Grays Harbor College Regular Interim Report for Reaffirmation of Accreditation March 2006 Contents Introduction Part A: Response to General Recommendations in 2001 Self-Study Evaluation of Goals Assessment Library Renovation Part B: Institutional Changes Standard I: Mission and Goals, Planning and Effectiveness Mission and Goals Planning and Effectiveness Standard II: Educational Program and Effectiveness Graduation Requirements Curriculum, Degrees and Certificates College Education Centers Policy 2.2: Educational Assessment Competency in the Disciplines Literacy Critical Thinking Social and Personal Responsibility Information Use 2006-09 Assessment Cycle Standard III: Students Admissions and Records Advising and Counseling Athletics Financial Aid Student Programs/Student Activities and Leadership Job Placement Title III TrIO Standard IV: Faculty Faculty Characteristics Faculty Development Faculty Evaluation Standard V: Library and Media Services Library Staffing Library Facilities Technology and Information Services Standard VI: Governance and Administration Governance Governing Board Leadership and Management 1 1 1 2 4 5 5 5 6 7 7 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 16 17 18 18 19 19 19 20 20 21 22 22 22 22 23 24 25 25 25 25 Standard VII: Finance The Foundation Standard VIII: Physical Facilities Standard IX: Institutional Integrity Policies and Agreements Informational Materials for Students Conclusion 26 26 27 28 28 29 29 Appendices Plan for Improvement 2003-2004 Plan for Improvement 2004-2005 Plan for Improvement 2005-2006 Strategic Planning Committee Membership Mission, Vision and Values Strategic Directions College Goals Program Planning Template and Matrix Plan for Educational Assessment 2002 Assessment Cycle 2003 Board Policy 106 Vision Mission Values Desired Student Abilities: Definitions and Objectives Title III Table of Funded Projects List of Grays Harbor College Committees & Changes Biographies Board of Trustees Organization Charts Financial Statement 33 43 47 51 52 53 53 55 67 70 73 74 75 76 78 80 82 Exhibits Institutional Effectiveness Reports 2002 through 2005 Employer Needs Assessment Current and graduate student surveys Strategic Plan for 2006-2008 Board Policy Manual GHC Website Facilities Master Plan Instructional Council Minutes 2001-2005 Grays Harbor College Catalog 2006-2007 Division Assessment Notebooks Annual Student Services Reports 2005-2010 Collective Bargaining Agreement GHC Website Professional Technical Post Tenure Review and Voc Certification GHC Foundation Financial Report 2004-2005 Vocational Program Reviews Online Enrollment Analysis Minutes Board of Trustees 2001-2005 Budget Books 2001-2005 1 Introduction In April 2001, Grays Harbor College completed its self-study and hosted representatives of the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities for a 10-year accreditation visit. The Commission’s final report commended the College for its high level of student services, its well-maintained buildings and grounds, and its commitment to serving all residents of the service district through distance education. The Commission also issued three general recommendations to be acted upon: develop a plan for the regular and systematic evaluation of GHC’s Priority Goals, implement a regular and continuous assessment plan for every segment of the College; and renovate the Spellman Library in compliance with ADA and safety regulations. The College community took to heart the recommendations of the Commission and established full compliance as an institutional priority. On April 24, 2003, a focused interim visit addressed the College’s progress on two of the general recommendations: Standard 1.1, the systematic evaluation of the College’s Priority Goals, and Standard 2.2, the assessment of educational outcomes. The College had already complied with the third recommendation of the Commission by completing a $6.5 million renovation of the Spellman Library. As a result of the interim visit, the College received a commendation on its progress for compliance with Standard 1.1. In addition, the Humanities and Communications Division was commended on its leadership in educational assessment. Though a plan for the assessment of student learning had been developed by faculty and was being implemented, the evaluator found that not all divisions had demonstrated significant progress. Specifically, the report noted that “Grays Harbor College has begun integrating outcomes assessment into its programs. The College community, most particularly, all of the faculty, need to embrace the importance of ensuring the integrity of student work and the credibility of degrees and credits it awards. Sufficient documentation that demonstrates the appraisal of educational program outcomes is still lacking.” As a result, the College hosted a focused interim visit in October 2004. That visit resulted in praise for the progress the College had made in educational assessment: “The Committee commends the faculty, staff, and administration for their responsive and collaborative role in developing a systematic assessment plan to evaluate its educational programs and document student achievement of program goals.” This work has continued, and the College is proud to report that a meaningful base of assessment work now exists, a base upon which the College continues to gauge student achievement of the educational outcomes articulated in the Desired Student Abilities discussed in detail in Standard II below. This report reviews and updates the responses to the Commission’s 2001 general recommendations (Part A) and presents an interim report on institutional changes (Part B). Part B includes an expanded update on progress in integrating outcomes assessment into the institution’s academic programs, analyzing student learning outcomes, and using the results to inform the teaching and learning process at GHC. Part A: Response to General Recommendations from the 2001 Accreditation Visit 1. The committee recommends that Grays Harbor College regularly and systematically evaluate the priority goals established by the Board and that this evaluation be used to influence planning and budget allocations. (Standard 1.A – Institutional Mission and Goals) Following the April 2001 accreditation visit, the College developed a comprehensive system for the evaluation of its Priority Goals. Working with the Board of Trustees, the College identified multiple indicators of effectiveness for each of the 10 Priority Goals. Measurement of these indicators is based on 2 qualitative and quantitative data from a wide variety of sources including the results of surveys distributed among students, faculty, administration, classified staff, and the external community. The first Institutional Effectiveness Report (see Exhibit 1), presented to the Board in February 2003, summarized this data and evaluated the College’s Priority Goals. That evaluation was the basis for the development of a Plan for Improvement, which included a summary of strengths and weaknesses identified within the report and also established Improvement Objectives and timelines for completion of those objectives during the following academic year. The Board adopted the Plan for Improvement 200304 (see Appendix 1), in April 2003, and $100,000 was set aside in the budget development process for requests directly related to meeting the Plan’s objectives. The College set aside an additional $100,000 to begin development of a strategic planning process. The Office of Institutional Research monitored progress on the Improvement Objectives, providing regular reports to the President and the Board of Trustees. Based on input from the Board, faculty, staff, and administration, the College reviewed both the Priority Goals and the format of the Institutional Effectiveness Report. The Board decided to combine two existing Priority Goals, and added a goal that specifically addressed access, a key component of the College’s Mission. Other recommended changes to the format of the report included the provision of information on data sources and sample sizes, responses broken out by constituency, peer comparisons, and additional data on student participation and access. Those changes were implemented in the 2004 report. An Institutional Effectiveness Committee, which included representatives from all segments of the College, reviewed the report. Based on an analysis of the data, the committee developed the Plan for Improvement 2004-05 (see Appendix 2). Members of the campus community were invited to apply for funding for projects related to the Improvement Objectives contained in the Plan. Those applications were subsequently reviewed by the Budget Development Committee, and a comprehensive list of projects was funded to forward the achievement of the College’s Improvement Objectives. During the current year, this process continued based on the Plan for Improvement 2005-06 (see Appendix 3). While this process proved effective for short-term planning, the College recognized the need for a systematic and inclusive planning process that would address longer-range goals and provide for integration of existing planning, budgeting, and assessment processes. In the 2004-05 operating budget, $100,000 was allocated for the development of a Strategic Plan designed to guide decision-making and resource allocation, thus providing a framework for the future. The entire College community has since been engaged in the development of this plan (see Appendix 4, Strategic Planning Committee), which has included revision of the College’s Vision, Mission and Values (see Appendix 5); replacement of the 10 Priority Goals with six Strategic Directions; development of 26 College-wide Goals designed to support achievement of the Strategic Directions (see Appendix 6 & 7); and completion of a two-year program planning template and planning matrix. The planning matrix, completed by all College program units, identifies specific Strategies, primary responsibility for achievement of those Strategies, assessment measures, and potential budget impacts. The Strategic Plan, from the overall Vision, Mission and Values to the specific action Strategies, is the basis for the budget development process (see Appendix 8). 2. The committee recommends the implementation of a regular and continuous assessment plan for every segment of the college in compliance with the specificity of Policy 2.2 – Policy on Educational Assessment. At the time of the 2001 accreditation visit, the College had been actively engaged in outcomes assessment at the classroom level for more than 10 years. The Outcomes Assessment Committee had provided the means to support and fund these endeavors, and the majority of full-time faculty had participated in the 3 effort. The recommendation of the Commission helped the College to focus on development of a comprehensive and systematic approach that would ensure the evaluation of programs, services, and student learning beyond the classroom. Grays Harbor College is proud of the significant progress it has made in response to the Commission’s recommendation. The College has invested in staff development, conference attendance, in-service training, and financial and clerical support for faculty. The campus culture related to assessment has improved as faculty, staff and administration have come to more clearly understand and value the positive impact that assessment can have on student learning and student success. All faculty, staff and administration have come to view assessment of student learning as an invaluable part of a College-wide commitment to continuous improvement. GHC’s Plan for Educational Assessment (see Appendix 9), implemented in fall 2002, is a comprehensive system of evaluation which requires assessment, documentation, and analysis of student learning at the course, program, and institutional levels and allocates resources to support changes as indicated through the assessment process. The Plan contains the following components: Articulation of Student Learning Outcomes: In an ambitious 2002 project, all full-time faculty revised course syllabi. Each course objective in each syllabus was linked to the identified student learning outcomes (Desired Student Abilities or DSAs). The level of emphasis placed on a given DSA in the course was rated using a 1–4 scale, thus clearly identifying what students are expected to achieve relevant to the DSAs in a particular course. Syllabi for more than 500 courses were revised to reflect the DSAs and made available to students on the College’s website. Syllabi for all new courses submitted for approval through the Instructional Council follow the format developed through the syllabi project. The fall 2002 faculty in-service focused on completion of a gap analysis in the wake of the syllabi project. Using the DSA ratings, divisions were able to determine whether all of the DSAs were represented within their division, whether the division averages reflected the goals and desired outcomes of the division, and whether curriculum changes were indicated to address any shortcomings or over-emphasis. During fall 2003, faculty developed objectives for each of the five DSAs: Competency in the Disciplines, Literacy, Critical Thinking, Social and Personal Responsibility, and Information Use. These objectives serve as the framework for consistent assessment across all divisions. Tracking and documentation is maintained by the Office of Institutional Research and the Office of the Vice President for Instruction. Development of a database system has allowed the College to analyze data at the instructor, course, division, and program level and to ensure that students earning degrees and certificates at the College have had an opportunity through their coursework to achieve mastery in each of the DSAs. Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes: In fall 2003, a three-year Assessment Cycle (see Appendix 10) was established for the assessment of the College’s Desired Student Abilities across all divisions. Divisions assessed each DSA over a four-quarter period by engaging in four activities: developing, piloting, analyzing, and revising/re-analyzing their means of teaching, assigning and assessing for skills and knowledge relevant to the DSAs. Divisions began assessment of a new DSA each quarter of the cycle. The Office for Institutional Research monitors and assists division faculty as they implement this process. The process used in assessing student outcomes has grown into a comprehensive process for the appraisal of student work leading to certificates and degrees. That process will continue with minor changes in the reporting structure. All five DSAs will be assessed by each division annually. Effective 4 July 1, 2006, the College’s Strategic Planning will occur in a two-year cycle with an annual update to adjust strategies and allocate resources based on progress toward identified strategic goals. The annual update will report division assessment results using the assessment analysis template from the previous three-year cycle. The strategic planning document includes a separate section for reporting assessment results. This new reporting method will more effectively link assessment results to the College’s mission and goals as well as to resource allocation. Assessment of Institutional Effectiveness: An annual Institutional Effectiveness Report provides faculty, staff, and administration with multiple indicators for the evaluation of student learning and the effectiveness of programs and services. Analysis is based on data from diverse sources including but not limited to: student work; a comprehensive data warehouse system linking student outcomes with employment; employer needs assessments (see Exhibit 2); feedback from local advisory groups; data provided through the community colleges’ statewide Student Management System; and national and local surveys designed to assess the perceptions of current students and graduates (see Exhibit 3). Alternative methods of assessing student perceptions are being considered. As part of the 2005-06 strategic planning process, the College conducted one external and two internal sessions to gather information about the institution’s current strengths and weaknesses, as well as the opportunities and threats that will face GHC in the next five years. That information, in addition to the data contained in the Institutional Effectiveness Report, was used to develop the new Strategic Directions and College-wide Goals that will guide planning, budget allocation, and assessment for the College. The program planning templates, which are an integral part of the strategic planning process for all areas of the College, provide an overview of the history, current status, and future needs of every segment of the institution. The Office of Institutional Research conducts institutional assessment activities and provides data to each College program for ongoing assessment and planning. Allocation of Resources: Funding to support the assessment process and to implement changes based on assessment results is available through a number of sources. Funding requests, which must be clearly linked to improvements in teaching and student learning and prioritized by each division, are considered in the development of the instructional operating budget after review by the Budget Development Committee. In addition, dedicated funding has been available to address Improvement Objectives that have been identified in the Plan for Improvement. The State Board for Community and Technical Colleges also provides each college in the system with a state allocation to support Outcomes Assessment projects. Funds are also available under the Title III Strengthening Institutions grant to support faculty development and improvements in student learning. Finally, funding for special projects related to specific outcomes can be requested from committees dedicated to issues relevant to that outcome (e.g. a project related to social/personal responsibility might be funded through the Diversity/Cultural Awareness Committee). The College’s progress in implementing the Plan for Educational Assessment is articulated in greater detail in Standard II below. 3. The committee recommends that the college renovate and remodel the John Spellman Library to meet safety and access standards. (Standard 8.A.4) Grays Harbor College has fully complied with the recommendation of the Commission. The College received $6.5 million in state funding for major renovations, and the facility was completely remodeled during the 2002-03 academic year. The newly renovated library, which re-opened in fall 2003, meets or exceeds all safety and access standards and is an asset to Grays Harbor College. Details of this renovation are part of Standard V below. 5 Part B: Questions Related to Other Institutional Changes STANDARD I: INSTITUTIONAL MISSION AND GOALS, PLANNING AND EFFECTIVENESS Mission and Goals Since the last full accreditation review in 2001, Grays Harbor College has reviewed and made changes to both the Mission statement and College-wide Goals (previously Priority Goals) of the College. Beginning in September 2001, Priority Goals established for the College and approved by the Board of Trustees served as the basis for the Institutional Effectiveness Report. Assessment and evaluation of the Priority Goals have been published in the annual Institutional Effectiveness Report since 2003. A Plan for Improvement, based on the data and analysis of the Institutional Effectiveness Report, has also been developed each year since 2003. Beginning in the 2004-05 fiscal year, allocation of some funding has been linked directly to the Plan for Improvement. Examples of initiatives supported through this process include the following: • $2,000 to support development of a federal TRIO grant, resulting in the College’s being awarded a highly competitive five-year grant that provides $220,000 annually to support low-income and first-generation college students; • $2,000 for Diversity Committee activities, including an all-day diversity training workshop for all staff; • $10,000 to support an employer needs assessment comprising personal interviews with more than 50 employers in Grays Harbor and Pacific counties to assess employer satisfaction with GHC graduates and job market trends within the college district; $27,000 for Library Media Services, including $10,000 to support part-time library staffing to expand access for evening and off-campus students, $3,000 to provide “Virtual Reference” to library patrons, and $13,600 to update program-specific collection materials. • A complete listing of institutional improvement initiatives is available as an exhibit. One Improvement Objective identified in both 2004-05 and 2005-06 was developing a comprehensive strategic planning process for the College. That process, begun in summer 2004 and involving students, faculty and staff as well as community members from the private and public sectors, has resulted in the development of new statements of Vision, Mission, Values, Strategic Directions, College-wide Goals, and Strategies for the College. The process, implemented during the current year, links directly to budget development through the Strategies and identified budget needs developed by each program planning unit of the College. Assessment of the Strategic Plan will be the basis for the Institutional Effectiveness Report and continuous planning for the College. The Strategic Plan for 2006-08 (see Exhibit 4) provides a framework for planning in six broad areas: Instruction, College Climate and Staffing, Communications and Outreach, Resources and Budget, Student Services, and Technology, Equipment and Facilities. Twenty-six College-wide Goals have been developed for this two-year period. Specific Strategies developed to accomplish the Goals will be assessed and updated annually. The Goals will be revisited every two years, and the Vision, Mission, Values, and Strategic Directions will be reviewed in a five-year cycle. The Vision, Mission, Values and DSAs were adopted by the Board of Trustees as Board Policy 106 (see Appendix 11) at its meeting on February 21, 2006 (. In a separate action, the Board approved the Strategic Directions and Goals developed by the College for the next two years. 6 Because capital project proposals were due to the State Board in December 2005, the Master Facilities Plan (see Exhibit 6) was updated prior to the completion of the Strategic Plan for 2006-08. This process invited input from the entire internal community and selected external constituents in a series of meetings that first assessed the needs of the college and then developed a plan to address those needs. The Facilities Master Plan proposes replacement or renovation of buildings for the district through the year 2014, and is linked to the College Strategic Plan. Proposals have been submitted through the State Board’s capital improvement process for a new Science and Math instructional building and a new Childcare Center, both on the main campus of Grays Harbor College. Planning and Effectiveness The College is engaged in a continuous cycle of planning, resource allocation, and assessment of the Mission and Goals, which are developed collaboratively among College constituents and approved by the Board of Trustees (see Diagram 2.1 below). Diagram 2.1 Planning and Assessment Cycle Continuous Planning Cycle OTHER PLANNING •Assessment •Institutional Effectiveness Report Instructional Programs Environmental Scan Student Services •Vision •Mission •Values Implementation Strategies and Budget Requests •Board Approval Strategic Directions and Goals Technology, Facilities & Equipment Resource Development & Allocation Communications & Outreach College Climate & Staffing The annual Institutional Effectiveness Report assesses the Priority Goals based on indicators of effectiveness for programs and services. The new strategic planning process combines assessment of programs, student outcomes, and services with budget development in a comprehensive institutional effectiveness model. Each year, Strategies are assessed to identify revisions and resources necessary to achieve the College-wide Goals. Those Strategies that identify a potential budget impact are carefully considered in a budget development and prioritization process. At the end of each academic year, the achievement of Goals will be assessed by measuring the completion and effectiveness of the Strategies. 7 Adjustments will be made to the Strategies according to their effectiveness in accomplishing the Goals to which they are linked. The expectations for the College are expressed in the newly developed Vision, Mission, and Values statements. These expectations will be assessed annually based on the new Strategic Plan. The six Strategic Directions indicate the College’s commitment to the evaluation and improvement of instructional programs; student services; resource development and allocation; college climate and staffing; communications and outreach; and technology, facilities, and equipment. Annual evaluation of Strategies will support ongoing planning in a continuous cycle of assessment, budgeting and improvement. STANDARD II: EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM AND ITS EFFECTIVENESS POLICY 2.1: GENERAL EDUCATION / RELATED INSTRUCTION There have been no changes regarding general education/related instruction since the 2001 accreditation. Graduation Requirements Several changes have been made in requirements for graduation since the publication of the 2000-02 catalog. As the College began serving more distance learning students and more students at the College’s several Education Centers, it became difficult to provide quality Physical Education activity classes for all students. The faculty determined that there were other ways that students could learn the importance of health and wellness and meet the objective of the Social and Personal Responsibility DSA: “Develop an appreciation for good health habits and physical fitness.” Through the regular curriculum and degree adoption process and based upon the Instructional Council’s recommendation, the President recognized the five-credit HPF 101 Health and Wellness course as meeting the PE graduation requirement (see Exhibit 7, Instructional Council minutes). This change took effect with the publication of the 2002-04 catalog. Subsequently, the Instructional Council recommended and the President approved the first year of nursing curriculum to serve as the equivalent of two PE credits. This change will be reflected in the 2006-08 catalog, currently in production. In addition, the Instructional Council recommended and the President authorized five credits of the Integrative Seminar sequence of courses, approved as part of the Reservation Based Direct Transfer Agreement Associate in Arts degree, to fulfill one-third of the 15credit humanities distribution requirement for students enrolled in that particular DTA degree. Curriculum, Degrees, and Certificates Grays Harbor College regularly and systematically reviews all curricula. Course descriptions and syllabi are reviewed every two years during the preparation of the College catalog. Proposals involving prerequisites, course descriptions, course content, and delivery modes are reviewed by the Division Chairs, after which the Instructional Council makes a recommendation to the President regarding any changes. A similar process is in place for certificate and degree changes. In addition, Professional/Technical certificates of 45 credits and greater, as well as Professional/Technical degrees, are approved by the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges (SBCTC). Changes made in the Associate in Arts degree since 2001 include several significant adjustments to both prerequisites and recommended preparation for a variety of courses as well as modifications to course 8 descriptions and the addition of a new course in Science Distribution area C: Geology 107, Introduction to Weather. Between 2000 and 2005, GHC adopted statewide direct transfer agreements in Business, Nursing, and three Associate in Science degrees. Specific details of these and other degrees appear in the 2004-2006 Grays Harbor College Catalog (see Exhibit 8). Changes that have occurred in professional/technical curricula since the College’s full-scale accreditation visit in 2001 are included Table 2.1. Note that the effective catalog year identifies the year a change appeared in the catalog; for example, a change made in 2001 would appear in the 2002-04 catalog. Table 2.1 Professional/Technical Program Changes PROFESSIONAL/TECHNICAL PROGRAMS ADDED/DISCONTINUED 2000-2005 NOTE: Catalog year identifies the year the catalog the change was implemented. For example, if a program was discontinued in 2000 or 2001, it would have been eliminated in the 2002-04 catalog. Catalog Year Program Degree/Certificate Type Added Discontinued 2000-02 Corrections Early Childhood Education Legal Secretary Machinist Technology Material Processes/Fabrication Associate in Applied Science/Certificate of Completion Associate in Applied Science/Certificate of Completion Certificate of Completion Associate in Technology X X X X Associate in Technology X Associate in Applied Science Natural Resources Restoration X Certificate of Pharmacy Technician X Completion Certificate of X Practical Nursing Completion 2002-04 Natural Resources Restoration (joint Associate in Applied degree) Science X Certificate of Completion Health Promotion/Fitness Technician X 2004-06 ** Certificate of X Automotive Technology Completion Certificate of Diesel Technology Fundamentals X Completion Certificate of Advanced Diesel Technology X Completion Certificate of X Human Services Completion ** These programs had been degree level only. Certificates of Completion were added to give students more opportunity to gain specific skills and enter the workforce earlier. 9 College Education Centers College facilities beyond the main campus in Aberdeen have undergone significant growth, expansion, renovation and refocusing in the five years since the last self-study. Riverview Education Center: The extensive renovation of the Riverview Education Center in Raymond has been completed, and classes resumed in the Center in the fall of 2001. Since that time, an Associate of Arts Direct Transfer degree has become available at the REC. This degree is offered with a significant portion of the classes available on-site in Raymond, either in face-to-face classes or via Interactive Television. Online courses round out the AA degree offerings. Columbia Education Center: A new facility is currently under construction in Ilwaco. Program offerings have expanded from primarily Community Service and Professional/Technical programs to include an Associate of Arts Direct Transfer degree, offered through a variety of delivery methods including face-toface, Interactive Television, and online courses. This expansion responds to demand in both community and Running Start populations. Simpson Education Center: The Simpson Education Center in Elma has undergone a shift in focus from Community Service, Professional/Technical, Academic Transfer, and Adult Basic Skills to primarily Adult Basic Skills and computer-related classes. This shift, established for the 2005-06 academic year, has occurred because of declining enrollment in Community Service and Academic Transfer courses. This area of the county has seen a significant population growth among native Spanish speakers. To serve this growing population, the College has hired a half-time bilingual outreach specialist and increased English as a Second Language offerings in East county. Stafford Creek Educational Center: As the offender population at the Stafford Creek Correctional Center has increased to the designed capacity of approximately 2000, GHC has grown to meet the increased educational needs. The College currently has 15 full-time faculty located at SCCC, serving approximately 900 students, producing 500 annual FTE. SCCC offers no degrees but does provide vocational certificates. All programs and courses offered at SCCC (Offender Change, Adult Basic Skills/GED Preparation, English as a Second Language, Computer Information Technology Certificate, Building Maintenance Technology, and Welding) are approved utilizing the same process as on-campus credit-bearing courses. Additionally, all of the Professional/Technical certificates of 45 credits follow a SBCTC standardized curriculum and contain the necessary related-instruction courses required by the NWCCU. POLICY 2.2: EDUCATIONAL ASSESSMENT Grays Harbor College is committed to the five Desired Student Abilities (DSAs) adopted in 1999 and reaffirmed by faculty, staff and administration in 2001. The DSAs represent the student learning outcomes that the College deems necessary for all students to achieve through their participation in programs and coursework at the College. While the DSAs cover broad categories of abilities, the College has thoughtfully developed them, as well as the more specific objectives that are linked to them, to guide educational planning and assessment at the course and program levels. Grays Harbor College’s Five Desired Student Abilities are: Competency in the Disciplines, Literacy, Critical Thinking, Social and Personal Responsibility, and Information Use. Descriptions of these DSAs, as well as the major objectives relevant to each ability, appear in Appendix 12. 10 All divisions are nearing the completion of an ambitious three-year assessment cycle. For each of the five DSAs, the assessment cycle comprises development of performance criteria, description of strategies employed to help students perform, development of assessments to measure student performance, collection of sample student work, analysis of student work in light of performance criteria, and recommendations regarding future strategies, assignments and assessments. This initial cycle forms the basis upon which ongoing development, collection, analysis, and revision can occur. Assessment documentation has three audiences. For the division, cycle documentation provides the framework for improvements in the teaching and learning process and allows faculty to describe and assess what is of value to the instructor, the discipline and the institution. For the institution, cycle documentation provides a framework for sharing the strategies and assessments that lead to success and allows divisions to make evidence-backed claims regarding both successes and resource needs. For external audiences (e.g. accreditors, the public), cycle documentation allows the college to demonstrate that students who leave GHC with a degree have achieved the Desired Student Abilities. It also provides evidence of the college’s commitment to assessment and to the improvement of student learning. Assessment of Desired Student Abilities Across the Divisions The following sections provide brief descriptions of only a few of the many specific examples of assessment work carried out in the instructional divisions. Thorough descriptions of each division’s work in outcomes assessment, with accompanying data, are held in Division Assessment Notebooks maintained by the Office of Institutional Research (see Exhibit 9). DSA #1: Competency in the Disciplines From the Science and Mathematics Division Project/Activity: Assessing Disciplinary Learning in Pre-Nursing Biology Courses Status: Assessment, Analysis completed; Action ongoing Assessment: The Biology Department met in fall 2003 and developed a matrix for disciplinary learning to be used in four biology courses taken by pre-nursing students: General Biology, Nutrition, Anatomy and Physiology, and Microbiology. Faculty worked to evaluate whether students who completed Anatomy and Physiology (AP) I and II were adequately prepared for entrance into the Nursing program. Faculty administered a survey designed to gather student input into the effectiveness of the AP courses as they are taught at GHC and to determine what kinds of changes could improve the quality of the courses. The survey method included a 43-part questionnaire followed by focus groups. Data gathered included student background, outcomes as related to all five DSAs, and evaluation of methods of instruction. Analysis: Twenty-one second-year nursing students completed the survey. Twenty of the students had completed both quarters of AP at the college while one student had transferred into AP II from another college. Eighteen (86%) of the students completed both quarters of AP prior to entering the nursing program. The other three students completed AP while enrolled in the nursing program. Student perceptions related to DSA #1 in the context of AP I and II indicate that most (95% -100%) felt the objectives had been met “very well” or “well” and all felt that AP prepared them for more detailed studies in the areas of health and medicine. Students noted that the course content is extensive and challenging. Some content needs more or less emphasis, e.g., AP does not cover the digestive system and liver, nor does the nutrition course cover the digestive system in enough depth. Expansion of the course sequence to three quarters would enhance student learning. 11 Recommendations/Actions Taken: Further analysis of student perceptions indicates that the AP curriculum is difficult, extensive and constantly evolving from an ever-increasing foundation of scientific research. Student outcomes in this course would be greatly enhanced by expansion of the course from a two-quarter to a three-quarter sequence. Faculty will explore the feasibility of making AP a three-quarter sequence. Additionally, curriculum for Biology 101 has been enhanced to help prepare students for transfer into AP I. AP students will be surveyed at the end of spring quarter to collect more information about how well Biology 101 is preparing students to transfer to higher level courses. From the Industrial Technologies Division Project/Activity: Assessing Skill Competency in the Welding Program Status: Assessment, Analysis and Action completed Assessment: In order to successfully complete their sixth quarter in the welding program, students must pass the Washington Association of Building Officials (WABO) welder qualification (certification) tests for welding in all positions with at least two different welding processes. Students must also demonstrate mastery of basic welding trade knowledge and theory during their sixth quarter through successful completion of a four-part capstone exam. This project gathered data on student success relative to these standards. Analysis: Analysis of student performance revealed an unreasonably high success rate on the WABO tests, even for students with modest skills. Faculty determined that the acceptable standard was too low and did not challenge students to excel. The capstone exam appears to be a good tool for demonstrating welding knowledge and theory. Recommendation/Actions Taken: As of fall quarter 2005, the minimum standard has been raised to require passing the certification tests for groove welding in all positions with the GTAW, FCAW, and SMAW welding processes. No changes were made to the capstone exam. DSA #2: Literacy From the Adult Basic Education/Developmental Education Division Project/Activity: Assessing Literacy as a Factor in Transfer from ABE to Developmental/College-Level Status: Assessment, Analysis completed; Action ongoing Assessment: Division faculty aimed to determine the effectiveness of assessments at gauging student progress toward literacy and explore the hypothesis that one roadblock for many students is the transition from ABE to developmental or college-level coursework. The data reveal that only a small percentage of ABE/ESL students continue in higher education after completing ABE classes, perhaps because of unfamiliarity and discomfort with college-level course work. To test this theory, the division piloted curriculum changes in ABE to assess whether students’ comfort level and knowledge impacted their transition to more advanced classes. Assessments were collected in English 060, Reading 080, 090, 120, Math 058, 060, 093, and On-Campus ABE/GED classes. Assessments included standardized tests (TABE and Nelson Denney) as well as exams, essays, and a pre/post test. The curriculum change piloted in the on-campus ABE class involved adding a transition component to the last hour of the 9 am – 1 pm class. On average, 7 students attended this “extra” session. Students learned to complete admission forms, financial aid forms and enrollment forms. They became acquainted with the quarterly schedule and catalog and completed an annual academic plan. They previewed college textbooks, toured the campus, and became familiar with different departments and the library. Guest speakers from counseling and financial aid attended. Once a week students visited college-level classes. 12 Analysis: At the end of the quarter, students wrote evaluations that included positive feedback about class activities and the knowledge acquired during the quarter. Students expressed more confidence about both their plans to continue their educations and their chances for success. However, the anticipated outcome – that these students will transfer into developmental or college-level courses at a higher rate than is typical – can only be assessed in the future when these students complete their ABE coursework. Even though the activities benefited the students, further development is needed in helping students make the transition to the next level of education at the College. The data collected from student work show that students are making progress in literacy. The division is attempting to make documentation of that progress clearer and is implementing new course material/techniques to enhance student learning. Recommendations/Actions Taken: The division recommends development of a class that will help to successfully transition students from ABE through developmental courses, if needed, and on to collegelevel work. From the Humanities and Communications Division Project/Activity: Assessing Inter-Rater Reliability in English Composition Status: Assessment completed; Analysis ongoing; Action forthcoming Assessment: Division faculty are conducting an ongoing outcomes assessment project designed to confirm that desired student outcomes, academic standards and assessment practices within the English department (and specifically among instructors of English 101) are well aligned. Although the faculty articulate similar outcomes, similar assignments, and similar assessment rubrics, they have found they do not reliably know precisely what that means in terms of the relationship between the quality of individual students’ work in different sections of English 101 and the grades/scores those students earn. Analysis: During winter quarter 2006, faculty met to develop a single essay assignment and accompanying assessment rubric that will be piloted in multiple sections of English 101 during spring quarter 2006. During spring quarter members will work together to engage in blind critique and assessment of a sampling of the papers created by students in response to the assignment. Establishing inter-rater reliability will ensure consistent evaluation of student work across the division. Recommendations/Actions Taken: So far, this project has resulted in the creation of an adaptable assignment, with a standardized rubric that includes clearly articulated performance criteria labeled according to DSAs in the works. Project participants anticipate gathering student writing samples during spring quarter 2006 and creating a matrix of scoring by multiple faculty participants for each sample. The results will demonstrate the extent to which the English Department achieves inter-rater reliability in the assessment of student writing and indicate whether further cooperation is needed to assure a healthy level of consistency. DSA #3: Critical Thinking From the Nursing/Health Sciences Division Project/Activity: Assessing Critical Thinking via the Nursing Care Plan Grading Tool Status: Assessment, Analysis, and Action completed Assessment: During 2004-05, faculty in the nursing program evaluated the effectiveness of the nursing care plan grading tool used to measure critical thinking. Using a sample of student care plans, the assessment helped to establish inter-rater reliability of this tool among instructors. The care plans are used throughout the nursing program to evaluate critical thinking and problem-solving skills related to the nursing process. 13 Analysis: In this assessment, 100% of second-year students obtained a grade of 90% or more on the care plans, graded with the nursing care plan tool. Results of this assessment indicate success as far as teaching nursing process and prioritizing patient care, but revisions will continue to be made to enhance the students’ learning. Recommendations/Actions Taken: Assessment activities can be improved by clarifying assignment directions to ensure increased success of outcomes. A clinical performance grading tool was re-designed to better assess student achievement of the Desired Student Abilities. This tool has been used for two quarters to evaluate students’ progress in the clinical area and in clinical testing matters. From the Industrial Technologies Division Project/Activity: Assessing Critical Thinking in Creating Carpentry Materials Lists Status: Assessment, Analysis completed; Action ongoing Assessment: Faculty collected student work in response to a variety of carpentry task assignments in which students were asked to develop accurate material lists using information found on construction drawings. Analysis: The analysis of student work showed that beginning students performed poorly on this task. Advanced students, who had experience with hands-on construction through working on the home built by the carpentry department the previous year, scored considerably better. First-year students who asked questions about unclear information on the drawings did much better and gained a much clearer understanding of the construction processes prior to doing the work. It appears that the drawings currently in use are not detailed enough for students with little or no experience in construction to accurately complete the assignments. Recommendation/Actions Taken: Construction drawings will be revised to provide a greater level of detail. Because one of the objectives for critical thinking clearly states that students must solve problems by combining and applying knowledge from multiple sources, students will be provided more research opportunities. Students will experience less lecture and more reading assignments using web sites and articles which will help them better understand the different construction processes. DSA #4: Social and Personal Responsibility From the Humanities and Communications Division Project/Activity: Assessing Social/Personal Responsibility via Peer Review and Critique Status: Assessment completed; Analysis and Actions ongoing Assessment: The English faculty have found that peer review and critique tend to provide more benefit to the reviewer/critic, who discovers what and how others write, than it does to the writer, who often receives inconsistently useful or even counterproductive advice from peers. This assessment activity examines current practices in order to improve the effectiveness of peer review and critique as a useful tool for revision. The process will also provide clearer/better links between peer review and critique processes across the writing sequence. Although this activity addresses disciplinary learning, literacy and critical thinking, its primary focus is on the social responsibility of helping peers to improve their writing. Analysis: A comparative analysis of both processes and results as they occur in English composition classes taught by a variety of instructors and in creative writing courses taught by a single instructor indicates that some of the standard review/critique practices involved in the creative writing workshop (group critique, oral critique in addition to written critique, structured focus on both strengths and 14 suggestions for revision) may be of use in the composition classroom, perhaps even as a replacement for the standard practice of trading papers for review and providing only written critiques. Recommendations/Actions Taken: Faculty will pilot some of the more public review and critique practices in composition classes during spring quarter 2006. Additional plans include developing a rubric designed to define and assess successful peer assistance. From the Social Science and Physical Education Division Project/Activity: Assessing Social/Personal Responsibility in the Criminal Justice Program Status: Assessment, Analysis completed; Action ongoing Assessment: During fall quarter 2004, students in CJUS 101, Understanding the Criminal Justice System, were assigned a short-essay research paper. Students were given a specific legal case-study in law enforcement that related to the relationship between the police and the court system and asked to evaluate the arrest procedures of a police officer as well as the impact of trial and appellate court rulings upon the actions of that officer. The assessment rubric for Social and Personal Responsibility outcomes developed by the Social Science division was used to evaluate Performance Criterion I: Respect (Self-Control), Performance Criterion II: Participation (Involvement), and Performance Criterion III: Self-Direction (Self-Responsibility). Analysis: Students demonstrated their ability to show respect and self-control in the research project by doing their own research in gathering information regarding the case-study, and to show self-control by insuring the proper format was used and the paper was turned in at the appropriate time. They demonstrated their participation during the discussion of the case-study and their ability to work without direct supervision throughout the stages of the research assignment. The grading criteria assigned to the case-study covered three categories, and included content, grammar, and presentation. The content aspect received the highest possible points, indicating research and understanding of the topic. Grammar received the second highest point content, and is an accepted part of grading student papers. Finally, presentation covered discussion in class of the topic assignment and turning the paper in at the designated time. An unexpected outcome was the number of students who failed to turn their papers in on time, and the number of papers turned in with a high number of grammatical errors. Recommendations/Action Taken: This assessment effectively covers student behavior as well as student responsibilities. Faculty recommend that more emphasis be placed on a student’s personal understanding of the assignment and how the DSA applies. In the future, more time will be devoted to explaining the social and personal responsibilities of the students while completing the case-study research assignment. This will occur when the assignment is given to the students. Class discussion will further ensure that all students are aware of the requirements and are prepared to succeed on the assignment. DSA #5: Information Use From the Business Division Project/Activity: Assessing Electronic Information Use in Computer and Office Technology Classes Status: Assessment, Analysis and Action completed Assessment: The division selected two courses to assess for student use of information resources. For CIS 125, Internet Fundamentals, faculty developed and piloted a rubric to assess student competency in information resources. In OFTC 220, Office Procedures and Ethics, students were assigned special projects which required them to respond to a specific information resource topic directly related to the course work of Office Procedures and Ethics. Faculty developed a rubric to assess student achievement of this outcome. 15 Analysis: In CIS 125, students demonstrated proficiency in locating and retrieving information from the internet, following written instructions and directions, knowledge of internet terms and basic commands, and linking information from one document to another. However, 40% of students were unsuccessful when asked to evaluate the information content and sources critically. Some students appeared to lack basic computer skills. In OFTC 220, students demonstrated a ± 100% effective and efficient ability to locate and access information, a ± 90% ability to evaluate information content and sources critically, and a ± 77% ability to use appropriate information to draw accurate conclusions. Recommendations/Actions Taken: Based on the results of the pilot, the instructor has revised course outcomes for CIS 125. Those outcomes now include the ability to determine the extent and nature of the information needed and the ability to identify a variety of types and formats of potential sources of information. Special projects assignments in OFTC 220 have been revised to include a greater emphasis on the ability to use information appropriately. For example, one project requires students to visit ten Internet vendor sites, gather specific data, and prepare a formal hard copy presentation. An evaluation rubric is used to measure student success. Across the division, faculty agree that information use is an important skill and intend to make additional changes, such as incorporating library orientation sessions into Business Management classes, requiring students to use outside sources for case studies in Marketing classes, and requiring students to use the internet to complete software application tasks in CIS 102 and 150. From the Social Science and Physical Education Division Project/Activity: Assessing Information Use via Research Projects Status: Assessment, Analysis completed; Action ongoing Assessment: During 2004-05, the Social Sciences division piloted an information use assessment and collected data from students. This assessment involved close analysis of specific research-based assignments in two division classes: CJUS/HPE 151 (Drugs and Our Society) and PSYCH 100 (General Psychology). Faculty first identified a specific assignment by type, developed an appropriate assessment tool to measure student mastery of information-use skills, and then assigned and assessed the student work. In the CJUS class, the assignment was the design of a drug-prevention program for a high school and the assessment tool was a rubric based on articulated performance criteria. For the PSYCH class, the assignment was a research paper and the assessment tool a modified rubric focused on information use. Analysis: Faculty discovered that students in the criminal justice class expressed their mastery of the DSA better in writing than orally, while students in the psychology class displayed a wide variety of skill levels in research methods and writing. Faculty also found that students often achieved minimal competency on the rubric even if their use of research resources was below the minimum required by the terms of the assignment. Finally, students seemed to have difficulty using information once they had gathered it. One positive discovery was that more time spent on teaching meaningful research led students to have more personal interest in their projects. Recommendations/Actions Taken: Division members agree that skills in information use are crucial for students who are assigned research projects and papers, and plan to devote more time to instruction in research methodology. Other plans include providing lists of resources at the beginning of the quarter, and dedicating more class time not only to building information-use skills, but also to instilling motivation to use information sources. 16 The Assessment Cycle: 2006-09 The College believes it has made significant progress in “closing the loop,” or bringing about significant changes that result in improvement to student learning. The process for the assessment of student learning remains the same. We will continue to focus on meaningful revisions in response to analysis of data. An additional emphasis for future assessment work will involve providing documentation of quantitative data that support assessment analysis. Each of the five DSAs will be assessed by divisions annually. The components of the assessment process will echo those used in the three-year cycle just completed: establishing/revising performance criteria; developing new or revised strategies/instruments to assess student achievement of the criteria; piloting strategies/instruments in selected courses; analyzing the data collected to determine what curricular or pedagogical changes might be indicated; implementing changes; and re-analyzing to determine the effect of the implemented changes on student learning. Divisions may document the process using either the assessment and analysis matrices designed by the Office of Institutional Research or alternative methods, provided that the documentation contains each of the components listed above for each of the five DSAs. Effective with the new assessment cycle, divisions will document their work in the assessment section of the college’s biennial Strategic Plan. In alternate years, divisions will submit assessment documentation to the Office of Institutional Research. As in the past cycle, documentation will include discrete analysis for each DSA; however, data on all five DSAs will be compiled in one document rather than separate pieces reported quarterly. Division chairs have responsibility for reporting division assessment results on the following timeline: July 2006 – June 2007 Divisions complete assessment cycle for each of the five DSAs By the end of fall 2007 Divisions report results to Institutional Research using above guidelines July 2007 – June 2008 Divisions complete assessment cycle for each of the five DSAs By the end of fall 2008 Divisions report results in the Strategic Plan using above guidelines After this three-year cycle, the college will begin work on its 10-year Accreditation Self-Study scheduled for 2011. At this time, the College community will evaluate whether the Desired Student Abilities as currently stated still describe the student outcomes that the institution values. STANDARD III: STUDENTS The Student Services Division continues to conduct both yearly student satisfaction surveys and internal self-assessments. Results from both are utilized in setting program goals and improving services to students. Student Services has initiated several improvement efforts during the past five years. For example, in fall 2004, the internal self-evaluation revealed that providing a convenient means for gathering ideas or questions would be useful, so a suggestion box was created and is now in use. A concern regarding the coordination of hours with the Business Office led to the Vice President for Student Services initiating meetings with the Assistant Dean for Financial Services to coordinate not only hours, but roles and services of the two departments. Similar issues and concerns arise each year and existing assessment practices provide a vehicle for learning about areas where improvement is needed. Other changes made in response to identified student needs include a new book loan service, an emergency fund, and a fund to assist high school completion students. Further, in spring 2003 the students approved a new comprehensive fee that covers the cost of assessment testing, parking, bus passes, and graduation. 17 Student Services departments provide yearly summaries of their goals, achievements and challenges, which are combined into the Annual Student Services Report (see Exhibit 10) initiated in 2001-02. Each year departments describe their successes in achieving their yearly goals and set goals for the coming year. In addition, a system for area program review began with an evaluation of the Financial Aid and Admissions/Records programs. Counseling/Advising and Student Activities/Leadership are currently undergoing review. Admissions and Records Admissions policies and procedures have remained consistent since 1999. The number of students taking Washington Online (WAOL) courses has increased from 33 annual FTE in 2000-2001 to 161 annual FTE in 2004-2005. The year past saw a substantial increase in Basic Skills enrollments (see Table 3.1), while the ratio of full-time to part-time students has fluctuated within five percent of an even proportion (see Table 3.2). Table 3.1 Basic Skills Enrollments Year Student headcount 2000-01 1011 2001-02 1113 2002-03 1170 2003-04 1007 2004-05 1302 Table 3.2 Students by Enrollment Status Year Full-time % Fall 2000 1426 48 Fall 2001 1388 54 Fall 2002 1230 50 Fall 2003 1347 54 Fall 2004 1262 56 Fall 2005 1096 45 Part-time 1585 1178 1240 1131 989 1366 % 53 46 50 46 44 55 Enrollments since 2000 have increased substantially when all fund sources are considered, while statefunded annual FTE have remained relatively constant, with the exception of an increase in 2001-02 (see Table 3.3). Table 3.3 Student Enrollment Year Total Headcount (all fund sources) 2000-01 6130 2001-02 6492 2002-03 6500 2003-04 6688 2004-05 6665 Annual FTE (all fund sources) 2015 2403 2361 2323 2399 Annual FTE (state funded) 1703 1829 1724 1736 1719 18 The department’s only personnel change occurred when the Curriculum Advisor, formerly assigned to the Counseling/Advising Center, was moved to Admissions. This change facilitated a more logical flow of paperwork within Admissions and placed the College’s transcript evaluation process, performed by the Curriculum Advisor, in closer proximity to the Registrar, who is ultimately responsible for such evaluations. In another significant change, Education Center sites can now be involved in registration meetings via ITV, which improves communication among all sites. During the last year the College formed an Enrollment Management Committee, which includes the Marketing Committee. In 2003-04 the Admissions & Records office set many effectiveness indicators, including processing all student admission notices within one week and increasing student satisfaction with advising and registration processes by 2%. The 2004-05 report notes that not all admissions letters were processed within one week so the goal was reset for 2005-06. The student satisfaction rate for advising and registration processes increased by 1% rather than 2% so that goal was also rolled over for the next year. Advising and Counseling Since 2001 the College has filled two vacated counseling positions and in 2004 hired a new Director of Advising and Counseling. The Perkins-funded part-time position has been combined with the WorkSource Center position to create one full-time position that maximizes service to students in Worker Retraining and Professional/Technical programs. A counselor now provides services at our Whiteside Center, which serves primarily ABE/GED students. Other additions include a part-time hourly advisor to serve students attending the Riverview Center, and a full-time staff member’s regular visits to the Ilwaco Center to advise students. Student evaluations indicate that the online orientation developed several years ago is useful. The College has implemented group entry advising as well in order to serve more students and to provide an orientation. Last year, group advising expanded to include a payment consultant who meets with students following advising to discuss payment deadlines and financial options. Anecdotal information indicates this has been helpful to students. Assessment testing has been expanded to include the WritePlacer, an online essay component. This has been in use only a few weeks, so effectiveness is yet to be determined. The department will work with faculty to review cutoff scores and recommend course placements. Last year, the College began offering placement testing in area high schools, and expects that the program will be expanded this year. Since the College’s last report, percentages of incoming students placing below college level in English and math have remained relatively constant, while the percentage of students unprepared for college-level reading has increased steadily (see Table 3.4). Table 3.4 Students Testing Below College Level Quarter English Reading Fall 2000 66% 46% Fall 2001 61% 46% Fall 2002 60% 48% Fall 2003 60% 50% Fall 2004 60% 54% Fall 2005 66% 59% Math 86% 92% 85% 87% 85% 85% 19 Athletics A new Athletic Director began employment in January 2005 when the incumbent became the College’s new Title III Director. In addition, a part-time assistant joined the staff in fall 2004 to help with the extensive work load of this office. Financial Aid In 2003-04, the Office of Financial Aid set the goal of reducing the loan default rate to below 14% and implemented new default prevention measures to address that goal. The process has been successful, with the default rate decreasing from a high of 23.3% in 2001 to 12.8% for the 2004 cohort – the last year for which data are available (see Table 3.5). Table 3.5 Default Rates Year Rate of Default 2000 16.10% 2001 23.30% 2002 18.80% 2003 13.40% 2004 12.80% In other changes since the arrival of a new Director of Financial Aid in 2000, the academic progress policy has been modified to allow students an additional quarter before being suspended. In 2003, the department established the goal of raising student satisfaction rates by 5%; in 2004-05 satisfaction rates had increased by 2.5%, so the department has set a new goal of improving by 2% in 2005-06. Finally, to assist students in making payments, the College has created a student emergency loan program, which has been instrumental in allowing students facing difficulties to remain in school. Student Programs This area is now called Student Activities and Leadership programs, a title that better reflects its focus and is better understood by students. A new leadership class will be piloted in 2006. In addition the coordinator has instituted participation in the AmeriCorps Service program. Also new is a program of transfer trips, developed in conjunction with the Counseling Center, providing opportunities for students to visit four-year colleges and universities in the state. Career Development and Placement Center The Coordinator for Career Development and Placement is no longer a co-located position funded by the local Employment Security office. With the loss of those funds, the position is now funded by the College using WorkFirst and Worker Retraining funds. Title III In 2004, the Department of Education awarded Grays Harbor College a Title III Strengthening Institutions grant which focuses on the “Improvement of Academic Programs, Faculty Development and Student Services.” This five-year federal grant provides $365,000 annually and covers the period October 2004 – October 2009. Included in the primary objective are four specific areas of emphasis: improving the transition rate of students who begin in ABE/ESL/GED and developmental education courses; 20 supporting faculty development activities that will increase student success; developing student services that improve the student’s overall experience; and enhancing institutional research and assessment. In the sixteen months since receiving the grant, the College has made progress in all four areas. Programs being piloted to improve the rate of transition for under-prepared students include the following: • Addressing success rates in developmental math courses by linking a developmental math class with a college study skills course emphasizing strategies for dealing with math anxiety and testtaking skills. Assessment results show that on average students in the linked courses earned a higher grade in the math class and attained a higher quarterly GPA. Staff continue to collect and analyze data on these courses, including student feedback, to determine the best model for future offerings. • A new career survey course targeting ABE/GED students was offered in winter 2006. This course helps students explore career options while gaining the skills needed to be successful at college and in the workplace. Staff will conduct focus groups to assess the impact of this strategy. • In summer 2005, three faculty members from the Developmental Education Division attended the Kellogg Institute to complete an intensive one-month faculty development course. As a result of the training, faculty implemented new teaching strategies in developmental reading courses during the 2005-06 school year. Assessment will provide data on whether those changes improve the rate at which students advance at least one grade level. The primary focus for improving student services in the first year of the Title III grant has been the development of a learning center and tutoring program. The College now has a fully-functioning learning center that has resulted in a 56% increase in the use of tutoring services and a 242% increase in students’ satisfaction with tutoring services. As of January 2006, students were utilizing the learning center and its services at a rate of nearly 1,200 visits per month. Learning center staff have also developed student success workshops which they offer throughout the quarter. At the beginning of each quarter a day-long student success conference, developed in collaboration with the developmental education faculty, provides students with a variety of workshops on everything from study skills to financial aid and transfer information. Learning assistive software purchased for math and GED test preparation has been installed in the learning center and at all off-campus education centers. A final emphasis of the grant is institutional research and assessment, specifically targeting program level assessment. To support that effort, funding has been provided within the grant to hire a research analyst for the Office of Institutional Research. Projects completed include administration and analysis of the Community College Survey of Student Engagement, completion of the annual Institutional Effectiveness Report, and development of a new college Strategic Plan. Each grant project/activity is also developed with clearly established assessment criteria in place. Results are evaluated and analyzed and appropriate changes are made based on the assessment. Institutional research provides baseline data, assists with the development of appropriate assessment measures, and assesses outcomes. TRIO In fall 2005, the College received for the first time a four-year Student Support Services grant under the federal TRIO program, designed to provide intensive support to 160 first-generation, low-income and/or disabled students who are in transfer majors. Three staff members assist students in improving academic planning, remediating academic deficiencies, setting goals, enhancing study skills, securing financial aid and transferring to four-year universities. Success of the program is based on the successful completion of eight program objectives, which are evaluated quarterly and reported on a yearly basis. The College 21 anticipates that at least 70% of program participants will earn a 2.0 GPA in their developmental course work, that 70% of the program participants will maintain a 2.0 cumulative GPA each quarter, that 60% of each year’s cohorts will be retained, graduate, or transfer to a four-year school, and that 42% of each year’s cohort will graduate or transfer within 3 years. Data will be collected through TRIO program resources as well as through institutional research. Quarterly evaluations will help the TRIO staff to make adjustments to better meet the objectives of the grant. STANDARD IV: FACULTY Several significant policy changes have affected faculty since the 2001 accreditation visit. Effective with the 2005-2010 Collective Bargaining Agreement (see Exhibit 11 GHC Website), the number of contracted days per academic year has changed from 175 to a range of 173 to 175 for on-campus faculty. In addition, the SCCC faculty contract has been revised to allow for a 215-day calendar, resulting in salary being spread out over a full year instead of ten months. Pay periods for part-time faculty have been revised to allow for payment twice a month instead of once a month, and full-time faculty may choose from a variety of payment options. In an additional change, the most recent CBA removed coaching responsibilities from the bargaining unit and the contract. The full-time faculty salary schedule has been revised, raising the lowest starting salary from $30,320 to $31,789 and the highest salary from $51,960 to $54,477. Categories in the Professional/Technical tracks were revised in the current CBA to reflect the changes in the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) for Professional/Technical Certification. Load ratio calculations for all Professional/Technical faculty were reduced in September 2001 from 4:1 to 2:1 for non-lecture contact. Additionally, the load ratio for Nursing faculty’s clinical hours is now 1.2:1. The College has matched the amount of money allocated from the state legislature for part-time faculty salary increases both times an allocation was available. As a result, part-time faculty salaries have increased substantially from $323.70 per quarter load hour in 2001 to $414.79 per quarter load hour effective July 1, 2005. Counseling and Library faculty salaries are $29.43 and $33.01 per hour. Senior Education faculty receive $17.66 to $19.12 per hour, and non-instructional (non-student contact) ancillary faculty receive $29.43 to $31.86 per hour. Faculty Characteristics In the years since the 2001 accreditation visit, the College has shifted its ratio of part-time to full-time faculty by steadily increasing the number of full-time positions and therefore the proportion of courses taught by full-time faculty (see Table 4.1). Table 4.1 Ratio of Part-Time and Full-Time Faculty Year # of PT PT% of # of FT faculty faculty faculty (head count) (head count) (head count) FT% of faculty (head count) FTE faculty 2000-01 215 78.5 59 21.6 119 2001-02 202 78.0 57 22.0 126 2002-03 171 75.0 57 25.0 120 2003-04 164 72.8 61 27.1 114 2004-05 155 70.4 65 29.5 116 22 Faculty Development The processes in place during the last accreditation visit continue to operate unchanged; however, the Title III Strengthening Institutions grant has enhanced resources and opportunities for faculty development in a number of ways. The faculty development component of the Title III program focuses resources on the exploration, integration and evaluation of learning/teaching strategies and other aspects of the college experience to support and stimulate change for the College. Faculty apply for funds to attend training, workshops or conferences as well as for supplemental contracts for special projects or release time (on a limited basis). Faculty may also apply for funding to support curriculum development and/or revision. Departments and divisions may also request funding for learning/teaching-related technological equipment or software. The expected outcomes of faculty grant activities funded through Title III include increased course/goal completion rates through the improvement of learning assistance to students; improved progression and transition of students from pre-college to college-level programs; strengthened learning in academic programs and services; enhanced skill in counseling and teaching diverse students; improvement in advising, course and career placement; accurate, ongoing assessment and analysis; and increased capacity of the College to retain and assist all students. Since its first funded projects in spring 2005, the Title III program has funded 22 separate proposals ranging from conference attendance to curriculum development projects to the creation of a guide for part-time faculty in mathematics. To date, Title III has allocated $15,580 to 18 faculty members across five divisions (see Appendix 13). Faculty Evaluation Evaluations of full-time tenured and probationary faculty as well as non-tenure-track faculty are carried out according to the terms of Article VIII of the CBA. The College has strengthened the role of the tenure committee in the evaluation of probationary faculty during the last five years by encouraging the committee’s focus on formative evaluation, which includes an articulated follow-through process for any problems noted as well as a self-evaluation process that calls for the probationer’s responsiveness to all committee suggestions. Post-tenure evaluation has been changed from a three-year cycle to a five-year cycle, which meets the criteria of the new Policy 4.1 on Faculty Evaluation. Post-tenure review and certification for Professional/Technical faculty are now on the same cycle and will be completed by the Dean of WorkForce Education. Although all post-tenure review continues to include classroom observation by an administrator, student evaluations, and self-evaluation, the peer evaluation that is optional for academic faculty is now required in the Professional/Technical certification process. Grays Harbor College has revised its Professional/Technical Certification processes and timelines to meet the new requirements specified in Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 131-16 (see exhibit 11). STANDARD V: LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICES Library/Media Services Library Staffing Library Media Services’ staffing has been revised: the professional administrative assistant position was eliminated and replaced with a classified Library Paraprofessional. The salary savings allowed increases 23 in part-time librarians, part-time classified staff, and an upgrade of an existing classified position, which have allowed the library to open one additional evening per week both part-time librarians and part-time classified staff, which have allowed the library to open one additional evening per week. Also, the student technology fee supports a half-time Instructional Technician for the Media Lab, allowing improved help for students and allowing the new Library Paraprofessional to devote more time to tasks such as ordering and cataloging. As a result, the College has increased its total Library Media Services staffing to 5.74 FTE during a typical week. Although this staffing level still trails that of peer institutions by 0.93 FTE, it does represent improvement. Library Facility An extensive renovation successfully addressed the Commission’s concerns regarding safety and access in the library facility. Library Media Services gained some 3,500 square feet in the renovation. This additional square footage improved comfort for users, larger study carrels and inviting lounge seating being the primary improvements. The popularity of this change is evidenced by increased usage. Before the renovation, the library would fill to capacity for only a few hours per day, and then only during the peak dates of midterms or finals, but the increased usage has now expanded to almost the entire quarter. Shelving of periodicals and media has been converted to open, browseable stacks, with results as discussed under circulation statistics below. The library has first call on the use of a general purpose classroom on the first floor of the building, reserving the right to displace other assigned classes whenever needed. The library’s needs dictated the furnishing and equipping of the room. As a result, the library not only has a better place to teach information skills, but the campus as a whole has access to an innovative alternative to the electronic classroom layout. The remodel includes a new lab that provides access to digital media technology for faculty, staff, and particularly students, who have made productive use of the facilities and equipment for a variety of academic projects and products. The new design has also made it possible to house some non-library programs in the building, such as the Title-III funded Learning Center and the new TRIO Program. These programs are a valuable asset to the students of the College, and they work closely with the library’s instructional efforts, thus strengthening all three programs. Maintenance of Library Resources: Data indicate a regular increase in materials expenditures during recent years. Especially noteworthy is the allocation for the past two years of additional funds for targeted collection development. For 2004-05, the library targeted General Reference and Literature, investing in expensive sets whose purchase had been deferred; in 2005-06 the focus is on Psychology and Natural Resources materials; in 2006-07 the library intends to concentrate on the Nursing monographic collection. Closer work with discipline faculty has resulted in written collection development policies that ensure proper selection of materials. Library Usage: Recorded circulation of physical materials dropped 42% during the year of renovation (2002-03); while there was a rebound after the completion of the renovation, circulation has not yet recovered to pre-renovation levels. Except for uses of books, changes in policies seem to account for these shifts more than actual changes in usage. Records of circulation for journals and recorded usage of media reflect changes in the library’s floor plan, since both were previously closed stack and now both are open for browsing by users. This has resulted in a decrease in recorded use of print journals, even though actual use may have increased. Policy changes allowing students to borrow media materials have resulted in a significant increase in recorded usage of those materials. Use of electronic journals continues to increase at three to four percent annually and was not affected by building changes. 24 Recorded use of books shows the greatest decrease. This may be partly typical of a trend that is apparent nationwide but can also be attributed to the age of the collection. As discussed above, the library is making efforts to address this problem of currency of materials. Information Services The purpose of Information Services is to provide appropriate computing, networking infrastructure, telecommunications and support services to faculty, students, and staff in order to facilitate both academic and administrative computing. Bandwidth requirements for both the main campus and the College’s Education Centers have increased tremendously. The College currently has a 10Mb fiber connection to the K20 backbone and T1 lines connecting the main campus to the four outreach centers, compared to a single 56Kb line to the main campus and no communications to the Education Centers in 1996. Since its inception in 1999, ITV (interactive television) capabilities have more than doubled. Resources include capability for two concurrent sessions at the Ilwaco and Raymond Education Centers and three sessions on the main campus. These capabilities on the main campus allow attendance at state-wide administrative meetings without affecting the ability to offer two concurrent instructional sessions. Each location has the capability to be either the initiating or receiving end. Student access to computing facilities has improved with the addition of an open lab space that is never used for classes and an increase in the number of open computers available in the library from 23 to 32. In 2006, current general computer specification is 2+GHz machines with 40GB hard drive, 1GB RAM and 17” LCD monitor, which is a significant improvement over the 2001 specifications (733MHz, 20GB hard drive, 128MB RAM and 17” CRT monitor). The student technology fee has been beneficial in providing the desired three-year replacement cycle for student lab machines. New software has been installed since 2001 to support the Nursing program, Medical Technology, CIS, Office Technology, GIS, Auto Shop, AutoCAD, as well as developmental reading and math. Replacement servers were installed for GIS and the primary Novell authentication and print servers for both instruction and administrative users. A server and software were added to support the Auto Shop program. High end computers were added to the Media Center allowing video editing in addition to other image manipulation software. A learning center was created with 12 general workstations and practice software for Math and GED Preparation as well as writing center activities. Network data storage space has been allocated for each student so files are available from any lab on campus. As indicated during the last accreditation visit as well as in the College’s internal scan, additional initiatives are difficult to support because of limited classified staffing. However, since the last visit, Information Services has upgraded the College’s email from a UNIX based pop mail system to a full featured Exchange2003 implementation running on a Windows2003 server. Though a formal helpdesk is not in place, the recent installation of a web-based helpdesk system will provide this much needed service to end users. The number of workstations for students has increased dramatically from 250 on the main campus and 90 at the education centers in 2000 to 382 on the main campus and 125 at the education centers in 2005. Total supported workstations is approximately 950 for all sites. In addition, there has been a 50% increase in the number of printers and a three-fold increase in the number of servers supported without an increase in the number or level of technical support staff. Staffing will remain a crucial area of concern if Information Services is to continue to provide highly valued customer service and even more critical in 25 the ability to provide new initiatives such as wireless access for students, SQL database support for new programs, an improved purchasing system, or support for requested document imaging installations. STANDARD VI: GOVERNANCE AND ADMINISTRATION While the governance system has not changed since the last full self-study and review process, there have been several changes to the governing board and the leadership and management of the College. The inclusive process of committee participation across the district has continued. The recent strategic planning process has included participation from virtually the entire College community and many members of the surrounding community. Governance Faculty, staff and students continue to be integral to the governance of the college through an inclusive system of committee participation that develops and reviews policy and procedure in addition to planning and implementing assigned responsibilities. All constituencies are represented at meetings of the Board of Trustees and President’s Cabinet, while faculty and staff comprise the greatest representation on other college committees. The list of committees is reviewed annually and revisions proposed to meet the changing needs of the college. The attached list of committee changes since 2001 reflects those changing needs over the past five years (see Appendix 14). In the past two years the College has established new committees to select art for the new buildings, plan for the performing arts center events, plan the budget, design college celebrations, undertake strategic planning, manage enrollment, and arrange for college special speakers. All faculty and staff are invited to select the committees on which they wish to serve. Appointments are made based on those selections. Communication within the College community remains strong with regular meetings of administrative, instructional, and student services committees. The strategic planning process initiated this year included several meetings with the campus community to explain the process, timelines, and outcomes of this activity, and comments were solicited on the College’s website. The President’s Cabinet is in the process of reviewing College policies for recommendations to the Board for update and revision. Governing Board The five members of the Board of Trustees are appointed to five-year terms. In many cases they are reappointed to an additional term of five years, but it is rare for a member of the board to serve more than two terms. Currently on the Board are three members in their second terms, two of those reappointed in the past year and one in his eighth year of service. The two other Board members were appointed to their first term within the past two years. The Board includes representation of the public interest and the diverse elements of the institution. This diversity includes the geographic areas of the district, labor and management, gender, and ethnicity. Brief biographies of the Trustees appear in Appendix 15. The Board is in the process of reviewing its policies to ensure their accuracy and applicability to the mission of the College. Policy revision, if necessary, will be accomplished by December 2006. Leadership and Management Although the college has undergone several changes in executive leadership as retirements and opportunities for advancement have occurred, there have been no changes in the inclusive processes guiding the selection of executive management and other leadership positions. 26 In 2004, following the retirement of a President who had served the College for 15 years, the Board oversaw a thorough screening and selection process involving the entire campus community, resulting in the appointment of a new President. Since that time, the College has engaged in its longstanding practice of inclusive screening and interviewing in order to hire a new Vice President for Administrative Services and a new Executive Director for the Foundation/Director of Development. The College is in the process of screening candidates to fill the recently vacated Vice President for Instruction’s position. Changes to leadership and management since 2000 include the promotions of the Assistant Dean for Human Resources and the Director of the Foundation/Development to the level of Chief. The Foundation/Development position subsequently returned to Director status owing to a shift in responsibilities. Some recent changes in the organizational structure include having the Chief for Facilities and Operations report to the Vice President for Administrative Services, establishing an Assistant Director of School/College Relations position, and adding administrative and staff positions for the new Title III and TRIO programs (see Appendix 16a and 16b, Organizational Charts). STANDARD VII: FINANCE The past several years have been a period of relative stability for the College in terms of resource levels and management. The financial statements for the past five years demonstrate that the college is financially stable and has sufficient financial reserves (see Appendix 17). Consistent leadership within Administrative Services from 1998 through mid-2005 resulted in improved internal controls and no recent audit findings. The position of Chief Financial Officer was changed to Vice President of Administrative Services in 2005, allowing for improved communications with others on the Executive Team. Although the budgeting process has been stable over the last several years, following a multi-step process to integrate the College’s Priority Goals and identified Improvement Objectives, the College’s recently instituted strategic planning process addresses the need to tie planning to budget and resource allocation as noted in the 2001 self-study. The process is an inclusive one, with all College programs identifying strategies, assessment measures, and potential budget impacts. Growth in grant funding continues for the College and includes a five-year Title III grant, beginning in October 2004 and bringing in approximately $1.8 million (or roughly $365,000 per year) over five years; a TRIO grant, also for five years beginning 2005, bringing in $220,000 per year for five years; and a Lumina Grant in partnership with the Evergreen State College for reservation-based Native American students. The Grays Harbor College Foundation Although the function of the Grays Harbor College Foundation has not appreciably changed since 2001, the Foundation has recently employed a new Executive Director, who is a half-time employee of the Foundation and a half-time employee of the College as the Director of Resource Development. The Foundation has grown its assets from $2,532,428 in 2001 to $4,116,157 currently (see Exhibit 13). The Foundation awards more than $250,000 in scholarships each year to support approximately 146 Grays Harbor College students, including several gender- and race-based scholarships previously handled directly by the College. The Hispanic Student Scholarship program originated with a Foundation Board member. The Foundation also plays a critical role in supporting capital projects for the College, including the Riverview Educational Center in Raymond, the Ilwaco Education Center, and the new Instructional Building on the main campus. The Foundation has also supported the college in recent years with equipment purchases, including a piano for the electronic Music Lab and equipment for the Fitness Lab. 27 Recently the Foundation initiated its strategic planning process to take a closer look at its operations, plan for the future, and reevaluate its mission and vision. While the major focus of the GHC Foundation remains to provide student scholarships, the scope of purpose has started to expand recently. The Foundation manages a book loan fund as well as the Umar Student Emergency Assistance Fund developed by a faculty member, and recently began offering 25 $1,000 tool scholarships for workforce education students. These changes and others have been driven by donors with specific interests, all in support of the Foundation’s mission: “to increase opportunities for deserving students to realize their educational goals by offering scholarship assistance and to provide strong support for the academic environment of the College.” STANDARD VIII – PHYSICAL FACILITIES The College has been fortunate in being able to renovate and add facilities since the 2001 accreditation visit. The driving force for facility improvements has been the GHC Facilities Master Plan, which will guide appropriation requests for capital improvements through 2014. The plan is updated every five years, as mandated by the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges. The most recent version was completed and submitted to the SBCTC in December 2005. This has greatly assisted campus facility planning efforts by providing a long-term, coherent plan for development over a multi-year period. Whiteside Education Center Addition: This “Families that Work” addition was made to the Whiteside Education Center in downtown Aberdeen in 2000-01 at a cost of $73,000. It provides an infant center space for babies ages one to six months while the parents are receiving instruction toward the GED. The Center also provides opportunities for instructors to observe parents and their parenting techniques as the parents interact with their infants. The facility meets state child care regulations. 500 Building Remodel: Completed in 2002, this remodel included a fitness lab, locker rooms, weight room and office areas; the cost was $300,000. With the increase in square footage, the remodel affords the opportunity for many more students to participate in PE classes in a much more user-friendly space. The building was transformed from an eyesore to a state-of-the-art facility. Over the past few years, the College has increased and updated most of the equipment for student use in both the weight room and the fitness lab. 300 Building Remodel: Major improvements were made to air quality of the building. The project upgraded the heating system by placing individual “univents” in all classrooms and some of the offices. Added mechanical building controls were installed. Most of the classrooms and a number of offices in the building were updated. This project was completed in 2002 at a cost of $400,000. Riverview Education Center Remodel: The Center in Raymond was remodeled to be able to offer on-site and ITV courses to North Pacific County students. This project, completed in 2002 at a cost of $1.3 million, provides an opportunity for residents of North Pacific County to obtain an AA transfer degree in their own community. In addition, residents can take courses that lead to applied science degrees and various vocational certificates. Courses are also offered in Adult Basic Education, GED Preparation and ESL. Community special interest classes provide enrichment and skill building for residents of the area. Spellman Library Remodel: Formerly, the library was a three-story (five-level) building with limited ADA access and insufficient electrical circuits, which created a variety of safety issues. The remodel successfully addressed access issues, student needs and major safety concerns. The remodel was completed in 2003 at a cost of $6 million. 28 Bishop Center for Performing Arts Addition: Completed in 2003, this addition increased the backstage area, added a green room/rehearsal area, added a set building shop and storage areas, updated HVAC, and remodeled the ladies’ restroom to increase the number of stalls. The remodel has provided much needed work and storage space. It also allows for expanded use by the community for productions requiring larger (deeper) stage areas. The Bishop Center addition was completed at a cost of $1.3 million. Columbia Education Center Building: This project in Ilwaco will provide increased local access to the AA transfer degree, applied science degrees, and various vocational certificates for students in South Pacific County. It will be completed in summer 2006 at an anticipated cost of $1.4 million. Additional courses are offered in adult basic education, GED preparation and ESL. Community special interest classes provide enrichment and skill building to residents of the area. Jewell C. Manspeaker Instructional Building: Currently more than halfway completed is a 70,000-squarefoot building on the main campus that will replace the 200, 400 and 600 buildings. It is scheduled for completion in November 2006; anticipated cost is $20.7 million. The Jewell C. Manspeaker Instructional Building replaces aging buildings and helps reshape the campus. This major addition to the GHC campus provides a 21st century learning environment and becomes the focal point for a new vision of the college. It will also update technology services in classrooms and offices. STANDARD IX: INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY Grays Harbor College continues to ensure high ethical standards in its treatment of students, faculty, and staff through careful articulation of expectations in various publications, conscientious adherence to the principles behind the expectations, and periodic review of the shared values that underlie those principles. Policies and Agreements Grays Harbor College’s Board of Trustees has adopted official policies on Ethical Standards and Conflicts of Interest (see Board Policies 108 and 109 in Exhibit 5, the Board Policy Manual,GHC Website). Additionally, the Board of Trustees has committed to the review and revision of all Board Policies before the end of the 2006 calendar year. Operating Procedures will be revised as needed during this process. The current procedure for adopting board policies remains the same as in the 2001 selfstudy. The College fully supports the policy on academic freedom as outlined in the faculty’s CBA, in Board Policy 205, and in the NWCCU Accreditation Handbook Standard Nine. There have been no faculty, student or community complaints upheld with regard to violation of College members’ rights to academic freedom. Following a negotiation process involving interest-based bargaining, the Grays Harbor College Federation of Teachers and the Board of Trustees have recently adopted a new five-year collective bargaining agreement. The agreement was ratified last spring and runs from 2005-10. Beginning in July 2005, the College entered into a collective bargaining agreement with the Washington Public Employees Association which represents the GHC classified staff. This master contract was negotiated on a statewide level for the 2005-06 academic year. Negotiations will begin soon on the master contract for next year. The College works hard to ensure that all procedures set forth in both negotiated agreements are followed, and engages in ongoing contract maintenance in order to minimize major issues in subsequent renegotiations. 29 Informational Material for Students After a thorough review of all published informational material by the College’s Marketing Committee, the College identified a need to standardize the publication of such materials through one office. This has resulted in the revision of our catalog, class schedules, viewbook and program brochures. Grays Harbor College will use the same format, color scheme, and branding for all informational materials. This format change is being phased in and will be complete by the end of the 2005-06 academic year. One area of concern has been noted regarding materials provided to pre-nursing students. During an October 2005 on site review, the National League for Nursing Accrediting Commission (NLNAC) noted inaccuracies about curricular requirements in published documents including the Nursing Student Handbook and the Nursing Program Information Packet. Nursing faculty has corrected the discrepancies and put in place an annual monitoring process. Necessary corrections are included in the 2006-2008 College Catalog. The College-wide focus in recent years on the Desired Student Abilities has increased cohesion among all members of the College community; in particular, focus on the DSA of social and personal responsibility has enhanced awareness of the need for ethics and integrity in a variety of areas ranging from students and faculty working together to avoid even unintentional plagiarism and other types of academic dishonesty, to all members of the College community demonstrating respect for those with whom they work and learn. Conclusion Grays Harbor College has undergone significant change in the five years since its last self-study. The College’s main campus and its Education Centers have experienced remarkable growth and enhancement of facilities through capital projects. New staff, particularly at the upper levels of administration, have brought with them fresh and innovative perspectives from which to go about the work of maintaining the College’s many strengths and addressing its areas for improvement. An inclusive and holistic new strategic planning process brings all members of the college community together to ensure the cohesion of the institution’s priorities, goals, programs, outcomes, and budgeting decisions. Perhaps most important, the College has achieved its desired focus on assessment of student outcomes through the application, assessment, analysis and revision of the Desired Student Abilities, not only across the instructional divisions but across the entire college experience. Appendix 1 AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04 Goal # 1 – Continue to improve instructional programs as well as student services and other support services. Strengths: Student satisfaction with programs and services is high – 84% are satisfied with the quality of instruction; 90% would recommend GHC to a friend or family member; 84% rate their entire educational experience excellent or good. Faculty, staff and community members are satisfied with programs and services – Over 90% of those surveyed agree/strongly agree that GHC’s transfer courses, ABE/ESL courses, Dev Ed courses, occupational programs and student services are of high quality; 89% believe GHC offers a comprehensive set of programs and services. Financial Aid is available to students – 72% of all applicants receive financial aid and the amount awarded in both need-based and non-need based categories increased between 2000-01 and 2001-02. Distance Education provides increased student access - Between 2000-01 and 2001-02 the number of distance ed courses offered increased by 25% and the number of students enrolled increased by 62%. Weaknesses: Enrollment of district high school graduates is declining – High school capture rate has declined from 25% in 2000 to 19% in 2002. Evaluation of library services is not included in current assessment activities. Improvement Objective 1.1 – Increase to 23% by Fall 2004 the proportion of recent high school graduates enrolling at GHC. Improvement Objective 1.2 – By Winter 2004, administer a system-wide student survey developed by the Library & Media Directors Council to assess the effectiveness of library services. 1 Grays Harbor College Aberdeen, WA Appendix 1 AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04 Goal #2 – Insure a student-centered campus that nurtures success. Strengths: Students believe GHC is student centered and supports student success – 69% of students surveyed felt that GHC provided significant support for student success, with another 27% experiencing some support.; 49% agreed that GHC provided significant financial support, another 27% said GHC provided some support. Faculty, staff and community members believe GHC is student centered and supports student success – 94% agree/strongly agree that GHC encourages student success; 94% agree that GHC is a learner-centered college. Students utilize programs that support student success – 883 students used tutoring services; 506 sessions were provided by entry advisors. Students successfully complete enrolled courses - 75% of students successfully complete core courses in developmental and college-level math and English; the % of ABE students achieving subject level gain increased from 28% in 98-99 to 45% in 2001. Degree seeking students achieve educational goals – Between 2000-01 and 2001-02 the % of students achieving substantial progress (graduates or enrolled 4 qtrs. within a 2-yr. period).increased from 54% to 68% for full-time students and from 19% to 30% for part-time students. Weaknesses: Lack of social support - only 28% of students agreed that GHC provides significant support to help students thrive socially while 29% said that this occurs very little. Low number of degrees awarded – GHC awards the lowest number of academic associate degrees compared to peer colleges; GHC awards the second lowest number of vocational degrees and certificates compared to peer colleges. Improvement Objective 2.1 Increase the number of students (duplicated) served through tutoring from 883 to 1000 in 2003-04. Improvement Objective 2.2 – Increase completion rates in developmental English classes from 69% to 72% in Winter Quarter 2004. Improvement Objective 2.3 – By June 30, 2005, at least 5% of the students entering GHC in Fall 20032will have received a degree or certificate from theGrays college. Harbor College Aberdeen, WA Appendix 1 AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04 Goal # 3 – Promote the continuation of the warm, respectful, collaborative learning and working environment of Grays Harbor College. Strengths: Faculty, staff and community members believe GHC provides a warm, respectful, collaborative learning and working environment - 81% agree/strongly agree with this statement; 90% agree that GHC is served by excellent faculty, staff, and administrators. Students believe that GHC fosters a warm, respectful, collaborative learning and working environment - 97% of all students view GHC as a comfortable environment, free of harassment; 59% believe GHC has significantly improved their ability to work effectively with others, another 33% agree that GHC has helped some. Achievements of faculty, staff, and students are recognized - Numerous opportunities exist for all classes of employees to be honored for their contributions to GHC; students are recognized through awards and recognition ceremonies, campus publications, and presentations by the Board of Trustees. Improvement Objective 3.1 – During 2003-04, increase by twelve the number of faculty and staff who have completed mediation training. Grays Harbor College Aberdeen, WA Appendix 1 AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04 Goal # 4 – Continually evaluate and respond to the educational needs of the communities we serve. Strengths: Strong relationships with the community – 88% of faculty, staff and community members surveyed agree/strongly agree that GHC is responsive to changing needs; 77% agree that GHC has strong, effective partnerships with schools, colleges, state and local agencies. Examples of partnerships include high school programs such as Running Start, Tech Prep and World Class Scholars; Job Readiness and workforce education programs in cooperation with Work Source Grays Harbor; and distance education programs and upside-down articulation agreements with four-year schools for students who want to pursue a bachelor’s degree. Students obtain employment after training – 56% of students responded that GHC helped them to acquire work-related knowledge and skills very much/quite a bit, another 27% said GHC helped some; 81% of completers and 68% of early leavers are employed 9 months after leaving college. GHC responds to the interests of local businesses and industries – Under the umbrella of the Pacific Mountain Workforce Development Council, GHC has developed programs with industry partners such as Boise Cascade to provide a trained local workforce for their new facility; GHC has been responsive to labor market shortages, providing increased training opportunities and securing grant funding for development of a regional response to the current health care worker shortage and partnering with others in a Co-Teach grant designed to provide teacher education to meet the shortage in the teaching profession. GHC has also provided customized training to meet the needs of specific employers. Advisory Committees provide valuable input – fully staffed advisory committees for all of the college’s professional-technical programs keep training current, relevant and responsive to changing needs. Improvement Objective 4.1 – Complete an educational needs assessment for South Pacific County by December 31, 2003. Grays Harbor College Aberdeen, WA Appendix 1 AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04 Goal # 5 – Continue to upgrade instructional programs and student and support services through the application of appropriate technologies. Strengths: Students are satisfied that they have access to computers and other technologies – 60% believe GHC provides ample places on campus to use computers and technology, compared to 48% of all community college students in Washington state; 72% identified the GHC campus as their access point for computer use; 57% agreed/strongly agreed that GHC has helped them to use computing and information technology, another 26% agreed that GHC had helped some; 79% of students said that they were very or somewhat satisfied with the computer labs. Faculty and staff are satisfied that they have access to computers and other technologies – 90% of all employees agree that GHC supports computers and information services; operating budget allocations are sufficient to support computer and related technology needs; a replacement cycle for all technology needs has been established and is adhered to; planning and decision making related to technology needs are fully integrated into the budget development process. New technologies are readily available – GHC continues to upgrade its instructional and student support service technologies to provide students, faculty and staff with information and tools that make teaching and learning easier and more successful. The Technology Fee, established by students in 1998, has resulted in over $360,000 of additional revenue to support these efforts. Improvement Objective 5.1 – Appropriately equip the new computer labs and learning center in the newly renovated library by September 15, 2003. Grays Harbor College Aberdeen, WA Appendix 1 AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04 Goal # 6 – Promote the health, welfare and equal treatment of all students, faculty and staff. Strengths: Students perceive that the college treats them fairly and promotes their health and welfare – 81% of GHC students believe that they have always been treated equally; 31% of students have often/very often engaged in a regular exercise program on campus (compared to a state average of 14%); 35% felt that they had gained or made progress related to developing good health habits. Faculty and staff perceive that the college treats them fairly and promotes their health and welfare – 84% of faculty and staff agree/strongly agree that GHC fosters ethical behavior; workshops, contests, and presentations sponsored by the Health & Wellness Committee and the Safety Committee are well attended and promote the health, safety and welfare of all GHC students and staff. Established policies and procedures assure fairness - Published and readily available documents set standards and guidelines for the equal and fair treatment of all students, faculty and staff. GHC supports the health and welfare of faculty, staff and students - Nearly 1600 students received academic, personal or career counseling in 200102; Employee Advisory Service provides referral for employees needing counseling for personal or work-related issues; instructional offerings include courses in personal development, wellness, and career and life planning; on-campus Day Care is provided to approximately 100 children quarterly - 62% are children of students and staff; nearly 12% of GHC students self-identify as having a disability - 45% of those students receive services from the Disability Support Services office; ASGHC provides numerous activities to promote health, wellness and equal treatment ranging from speakers and retreats to musical performances and ethnic celebrations. Professional development is encouraged and supported - All employee groups have resources devoted to and opportunities provided for professional development. A large proportion of employees participate in some such activity including academic credit courses, conferences, workshops, tuition waivers, and sabbatical leave. Weaknesses: Students perceive that the college does not emphasize ethical behaviors - Only 30% of students surveyed agreed that the college helped them very much/quite a bit to develop a personal code of values and ethics compared to 37% of students in the national sample; 28% said that the college did very little to help them. Improvement Objective 6.1 – 6 In the spring of 2005, at least, 35% of GHC’s students will report that their experiences at the college contributed “very much or quite a lot” to their skills and abilities in developing a personal code of values and ethics. This represents a 5% improvement from a baseline of 30% in 2002. Grays Harbor College Aberdeen, WA Appendix 1 AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04 Goal # 7 – Recognize and enhance the strengths inherent in the diversity within our college, community and nation. Strengths: Faculty and staff perceive that the college promotes diversity – 89% of faculty and staff believe that the college promotes diversity. Student population reflects ethnic diversity – GHC student population is more ethnically diverse than the community it serves. All minority groups are more represented in the student population, reflecting GHC’s commitment to ESL/ABE educational opportunities for these residents. Academic curriculum emphasizes cultural diversity - 56 courses in the academic curriculum include a cultural diversity component. Students, faculty and staff have opportunities to participate in multicultural activities – The GHC Multicultural Committee, the Associated Students of GHC, and the Bishop Center for Performing Arts, all supported by college resources, provide numerous opportunities for students, faculty, staff and the community to experience cultural and ethnic diversity through educational and entertainment avenues. Weaknesses: Students do not perceive that the college promotes diversity – Only 35% of students agreed that the college encourages contact among students from different backgrounds very much/quite a bit, nearly ¼ felt that the college made very little effort to do this. Only 34% said that GHC had helped them to understand people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds, more than 1/3 said that the college had done this very little. Only 36% had had serious conversations with students of different races often/very often while 27% said that they never did this. Only 42% had had serious conversations with students of different religious, political or personal beliefs often/very often while 23% said that they had never done this. Employee population does not reflect ethnic diversity - GHC employees are not as diverse as the surrounding community. Minority employees are under represented. Improvement Objective 7.1 – During 2003-04, the college will increase by, at least, one FTE the number of people of color working at GHC. Improvement Objective 7.2 – By the spring of 2005, 45% of GHC’s students will report that the college encourages contact among students from different backgrounds very much or quite a lot – a 10% improvement over a baseline of 35% in 2002. 7 Grays Harbor College Aberdeen, WA Appendix 1 AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04 Goal # 8 – Manage the resources of the college efficiently and effectively and diversify the sources of revenue appropriately to achieve the mission and priorities of the college. Strengths: Faculty, staff and community members perceive that the college manages its resources well – 73% of those surveyed agree/strongly agree with this statement. Staffing ratios compare favorably with peer colleges – When compared to the four community colleges closest in size, GHC had the 2nd lowest FTE and student headcount. Staffing levels correlated closely with this – overall, GHC’s staffing level was the lowest among its peers, representing efficiency of resources. The college actively seeks to diversify its revenue sources – The GHC Foundation contributes over $200,000 annually to support student scholarships, college initiatives and capital projects; federal, state, private industry and education partner grants exceeded 2.2 million in 2001-02; GHC students contribute approximately $85,000 annually through a Technology Fee to support technology improvements; student activity fees of approximately $200,000 annually support student government, athletics, and a variety of student clubs. State laws and regulations governing the college’s resources are strictly followed - State audits of the college’s resources demonstrate compliance; findings and suggestions for improvement are immediately addressed. Budget development is inclusive and involves all constituencies – A comprehensive budget development process tied to the mission and goals of the college includes students, faculty, and staff. The college has an operational Facilities Master Plan - Developed by community members, staff, students, faculty and outside consultants, the Facilities Master Plan provides short, medium and long range plans for replacement and renovation of the college’s facilities. With its vision clearly articulated, the college has been able to acquire capital funding and ambitious first steps are currently underway. Operating budget expenditures and revenues are in balance – All general fund balances are closely monitored and adequate fund balances maintained. Improvement Objective 8.1 – By December 31, 2004, the design phase for the new classroom building will be completed, so that construction could begin as early as July 2005. Grays Harbor College Aberdeen, WA Appendix 1 AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04 Goal #9 – Effectively market and promote GHC programs and the services it provides. Strengths: Faculty, staff and community members believe that GHC effectively markets its programs and services - 73% agree/strongly agree with this statement. GHC uses a variety of media to promote its programs and services – All 50,000 homes in the service district receive the quarterly schedule; other publications include the GHC General Catalog, the GHC Viewbook, and Professional/Technical Degree Brochures. In addition, newspaper, radio, television, movie theatre ads, the World Wide Web, presentations, student ambassadors and high school guidance counselor exchanges are used to promote the college. Marketing strategies have been developed to address the diversity in age and educational needs within the district and resources devoted to marketing have been increased 46% over the last two years. The college serves the community beyond its academic mission - In addition to its academic mission, the college is an integral part of the community socially and culturally and widely promotes those opportunities for district residents. The Bishop Center for Performing Arts mails over 3300 season brochures to its patrons as well as promoting its events in the newspaper, on radio and on the GHC website; as a member of NWAACC, GHC teams compete in seven different sports for both men and women – such events are co-sponsored by local banks and supported by the community-based Choker Club; GHC student clubs actively support local charities including food and clothing banks, toy drives, and cancer fundraising events; college facilities are used to host a wide variety of community events including health promotions, job fairs, knowledge bowl competition, military recruitment, information booths and ethnic celebrations. Improvement Objective 9.1 – By Spring 2004, develop a compact disc for distribution to prospective students that provides information comparable to that contained in the hard copy “Viewbook.” Grays Harbor College Aberdeen, WA Appendix 1 AN IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR 2003-04 Goal # 10 – Continue to provide high quality and culturally enriching arts exhibitions, activities, presentations and performances. Strengths: Faculty, staff and community members perceive that the college provides high quality arts exhibitions, activities, presentations and performances 92% of those surveyed agreed/strongly agreed with this statement; the Bishop Center continues to receive funding from public grants, foundations, corporate sponsors and private donors in support of its high quality programming. Attendance at events continues to grow - Attendance at Bishop Center events has increased 50% from 5214 in 1996-97 to 7823 in 2001-02. In keeping with its mission statement to “make programming for children and families a high priority” the Bishop Center has coordinated with local school districts to provide daytime performances for students at reduced prices. Nearly 2000 students attended these performances in 2001-02. The college provides a variety of performances, arts exhibits, and presentations annually – Through the Bishop Center for Performing Arts, the John Spellman Library Art Gallery, the GHC Athletic Department, and the Associated Student of Grays Harbor College, the college provides area residents with a rich variety of educational, athletic and cultural events from which to choose. In addition to encouraging appreciation of the arts, many performances include workshops that allow residents to gain skills in performance. Though GHC is located in a rural community that is both economically depressed and limited in diversity, its efforts provide residents with the opportunity to gain a deeper appreciation of the arts and a deeper understanding of cultural diversity. In doing so, GHC lives up to its mission to “improve lives through education.” Improvement Objective 10.1 – • By Fall 2003, reopen the newly renovated Bishop Center with a gala event and a culturally enriching schedule of productions for 2003-04. Improvement Objective 10.2 – • Throughout the 2003-04 school year, sponsor culturally enriching art exhibits in the new art gallery within the newly renovated Spellman Library. Improvement Objective 10.3 – • By Spring 2004, dedicate a new and appropriate work of art to the many former employees who committed their professional lives to making GHC an effective college committed to student learning. Grays Harbor College Aberdeen, WA Appendix 2 Grays Harbor College Priority Goals and Institutional Effectiveness An Improvement Plan for 2004-05 $200,000 of one-time local funds has been incorporated into the operating budget for 2004-05. $100,000 of these funds has been allocated for specific improvement objectives highlighted below. The other $100,000 has been set aside for future initiatives and strategic planning. 1 Access – Provide equal opportunities and equal access to quality education for life-long learning. Objectives for 2004 – 05 By Winter 2006, complete a plan for expansion of programs and services at Ilwaco Education Center, based on completed Needs Assessment, which will improve Pacific County service levels. During 2004-05, improve access at off campus locations that are currently under-served. Suggestions included investigating alternative course delivery at SCCC, for example, correspondence courses; offering on-site or ITV classes at Taholah based on an informal needs assessment of residents. During 2004-05, increase the number of scholarship applications received and funds awarded. 2 Improvement – Continue to improve instructional programs as well as student services and other support services Objectives for 2004 – 05 *By Fall 2004, increase to 23% the proportion of recent high school graduates enrolling at GHC. *By Spring 2004, administer a student survey developed by the Library & Media Directors Council to assess the effectiveness of library services. During Fall 2004, host a successful visit by the Commission on Colleges that results in a finding of full compliance with the Commission’s previous recommendations regarding educational assessment. Improve overall DSA rating for Social & Personal Responsibility (2.38). Suggestions included identifying all courses in the quarterly schedule that have a diversity component; asking faculty to review Social & Personal Responsibility DSA to specifically identify diversity component. Improve overall DSA rating for Information Use (2.25) by providing faculty professional development activities. Suggestions included sending a core group of faculty to training available through Library & Media Directors Council; providing a guest speaker from a 4-yr. school to share the expectations they have of our transfer students related to information competency. Provide increased faculty and staff development opportunities. Suggestions included “teacher training” for all new faculty; ITV training for instructors teaching on-line, development of skills in the use of media technology, courses in conversational Spanish. Conduct regular and systematic program review/evaluations to assess performance. Currently, three vocational programs and two areas of student services complete in-depth reviews annually. o Funded $4,500 to conduct program review for Business Office and Purchasing o Funded $50,000 to Instruction for various projects to be determined by the V.P. for Instruction, with assistance from the Division Chairs. Itemized projects that are funded will be linked to Improvement Objectives. 3 Student Success – Insure a student-centered campus which nurtures success. Objectives for 2004 – 05 *In 2003 – 04, increase the number of students served through tutoring from 883 to 1000. *In Winter 2004, increase completion rates in developmental English classes from 69% to 72%. Establish a Fall 2004 cohort of degree-seeking students as a baseline measure for successful degree completion. Increase use of available student support services such as tutoring services, the Writing Desk, and participation in the Early Intervention process. In Fall 2004, complete application for a TRIO Grant designed to support first-generation, low-income students. o Funded $2,000 to support the TRIO grant development and review. During 2004-05, improve the rate of student progression from ABE to developmental/college level courses. Suggestions included piloting a Transition Class designed to prepare students for success, increasing ABE student contact with counselors and other departments on the main campus. o Funded $22,500 to develop a tracking system to support the retention and progression of students. 4 Collaboration, Health & Welfare – Promote the health, welfare and equal treatment of all students, faculty, and staff by providing a respectful, collaborative learning and working environment. Objectives for 2004 – 05 *During 2003 – 04, increase by 12 the number of faculty and staff who have completed mediation training. *In Spring 2005, at least 35% of GHC’s students will report that their experiences at the college contributed “very much or quite a lot” to their skills and abilities in developing a personal code of values and ethics. This will represent a 5% improvement from a baseline of 30% in 2002. o Funded $4,500 to administer the CCSSE in order to measure progress toward this goal. During 2004-05, provide enhanced tools, techniques, and training designed to promote a quality working environment for all staff. o Funded $5,000 to hire a team building consultant for Nursing. o Funded $2,000 for Student Services divisional team building and training. *Carry-over objectives from 2003-04 Improvement Plan 5 Community – Continually evaluate and respond to the educational needs of the community we serve. Objectives for 2004 – 05 During 2004-05, conduct a community and employer needs assessment to serve as the framework for a strategic plan that will allow GHC to continue to be responsive to the needs of the community. 6 Technology – Continue to upgrade instructional programs and student and support services through the application of appropriate technologies. Objectives for 2004 – 05 Improve service and efficiency for students by increasing use of on-line student services. Suggestions included increasing the # of students using web registration; linking the Schedule Planner tool with the Online Orientation module. Explore enhanced use of technology to improve programs and services, for example, wireless technology and document imaging. o Funded $2,500 to improve the performance quality at the Bishop Center with upgrades to the sound system. 7 Diversity – Recognize and enhance the strengths inherent in the diversity within our college, community, and nation. Objectives for 2004 – 05 *By Spring 2005, 45% of GHC’s students will report that the college encourages contact among students from different backgrounds “very much or quite a lot” – a 10% improvement over a baseline of 35% in 2002. o Funded $4,500 to administer the CCSSE in order to measure progress toward this goal. Beginning Fall 2004, host a quarterly campus-wide event to foster awareness of diversity issues. o Funded $2,000 for Diversity Committee activities. During 2004-05, the college will continue to develop recruitment strategies designed to increase the number of qualified applicants of color. 8 Resources – Manage the resources of the college efficiently and effectively and diversify the sources of revenue appropriately to achieve the mission and priorities of the college. Objectives for 2004 – 05 *By December 31, 2004, the design phase for the new classroom building will be completed so that construction could begin as early as July 2005. *Carry-over objectives from 2003-04 Improvement Plan 9 In 2004-05, acquire state funding for Replacement Building One and Replacement Building Two as outlined in the Facilities Master Plan. In 2004-05, acquire state funds for the next phase of major capital projects.y June 2005, raise $350,000 in private matching funds to support construction of the Ilwaco Education Center. Marketing – Effectively market and promote GHC programs and the services provided. Objectives for 2004 – 05 *By Spring 2004, develop a compact disc version of the GHC catalog for distribution to prospective students. Build on “word-of-mouth” marketing strategy by using the GHC website to feature quotes from current students and alumni, with links to related program information. o Funded $5,000 for marketing efforts. 10 Cultural Enhancement – Continue to provide high quality and culturally enriching art exhibitions, activities, presentations, and performances. Objectives for 2004 – 05 *By Spring 2004, dedicate a new and appropriate work of art to the many former employees who committed their professional lives to making GHC an effective college committed to student learning. During 2004-05, increase support for the Bishop Center for Performing Arts by obtaining at least 3 arts grants and increasing private donations by at least 10%. During Summer 2004, expand programming and performance opportunities at the Bishop Center for Performing Arts by offering a summer production of “Les Miserable” performed by local high school students. *Carry-over objectives from 2003-04 Improvement Plan Appendix 3 Grays Harbor College Priority Goals and Institutional Effectiveness An Improvement Plan for 2005-06 1 Access – Provide equal opportunities and equal access to quality education for life-long learning. Objectives for 2005-06 In January 2006, expand programs and services at the new Ilwaco Education Center resulting in an increase of 15 FTE. Expand programming in Pacific County by implementing an Entrepreneurship program based on NxLevel training. The program will begin in Ilwaco in September 2005 and in Raymond by January 2006. Beginning July 2005, GHC will offer an online transfer associate degree in Corrections that will interface with WSU’s bachelors degree in Criminal Justice. Increase opportunities for bachelor’s degree attainment by offering a “major ready” transfer associate degree that will interface with TESC’s Native American Studies program. Beginning in Fall 2005, the program will use online and seminar formats to serve the Quinault, Skokomish, S’Klallam, Nisqually, Muckleshoot, and Makah tribes. In 2005-06, implement College in the High School in the Elma School District. 2 Improvement – Continue to improve instructional programs as well as student services and other support services Objectives for 2005-06 Using the results of the CCSSE and internal assessment activities, continue to provide support and resources to improve educational outcomes for students. During 2005-06, develop new programs based on needs identified through the strategic planning process and available resources. During spring quarter 2006, administer student and faculty surveys to assess the effectiveness of Library and Media services. During 2005-06, transfer programs will be updated following the guidelines of ICRC. By January 2006, GHC’s strategic plan will be completed and implementation will begin. Provide increased outreach to area high schools through on-site testing/advising and more collaborative relationships with high school personnel including a possible joint in-service for high school/college instructors. Improve course alignment between high school and college curriculum. During spring 2006, GHC will undergo its five year accreditation visit by the Commission on Colleges and will successfully meet all requirements. Pilot immersion techniques for information competency in linked course and develop measures of student attainment of information competency. 3 Student Success – Insure a student-centered campus which nurtures success. Objectives for 2005-06 ¾ ¾ ¾ In winter 2005, increase completion rates in developmental Math classes by 5%. Implement TRIO grant objectives in support of first-generation, low income students. Implement Title III objectives: Increase the number of students receiving tutoring and writing desk services by 15%, from 1094 in 2004-05 to 1258 in 2005-06. During 2005-06, 100% of tutors will complete a tutor training program compared to 10% of tutors in 2003-04. During fall 2006, implement a pilot support program for students enrolled in ENGL 60 and ENGL 095 (might be changed to Reading) that will result in a 25% higher success rate compared to students not participating in the pilot. In 2005-06, the Counseling Center will implement a new intervention program, “Pathways to Success.” 4 Collaboration, Health & Welfare – Promote the health, welfare and equal treatment of all students, faculty, and staff by providing a respectful, collaborative learning and working environment. Objectives for 2005-06 Successfully implement the new civil service system for classified staff beginning July 1, 2005. During 2005-06, continue to provide training for employees on human resource topics including sexual harassment, workplace violence, etc. During 2005-06, the Human Resources department will implement a comprehensive orientation for new employees. During summer 2005, three faculty members will attend the Kellogg Institute, a highly regarded program which focuses on teaching strategies that lead to increased student success. During 2005-06, celebrate the 75th anniversary of Grays Harbor College. Explore possible options for improving winter safety on pathways, etc. Purchase/install new exercise equipment in the fitness lab and develop strategies to increase the number of students using the fitness facility. Purchase Automatic External Defibrillators for Whiteside, Ilwaco, and Riverside Education Centers. 5 Community – Continually evaluate and respond to the educational needs of the community we serve. Objectives for 2005-06 Expand course offerings for employees of Westport Shipyard by offering marine electrical courses and expanding yacht finish carpentry courses from three to six. During 2005-06, the Natural Resources program will undergo program revision designed to better address market needs. Collaborate with area business and industry to develop more contract courses and customized training for soft skills. Continue to be an active partner in Light2 and determine ways to link the work of this organization with the objectives of the college. 6 Technology – Continue to upgrade instructional programs and student and support services through the application of appropriate technologies. Objectives for 2005-06 During 2005-06, develop a college-wide technology plan as part of the college’s strategic planning process. During 2005-06, successfully re-host GHC’s data information systems to a new windows-based platform being implemented across the system. During 2005-06, implement new copy/printer policies, based on the recommendations of an internal committee and an outside consultant that will provide centralized technology to reduce costs while also considering individual and division needs. Improve technology at off-campus sites by having the same high-quality, compatible ITV equipment in two rooms for each off-campus site. During 2005-06, identify classroom technology needs that will be included in the new instructional building. Meet instructional needs for computers and technology in classrooms providing specialized instruction, i.e., CD burning capability in at least one computer classroom. 7 Diversity – Recognize and enhance the strengths inherent in the diversity within our college, community, and nation. Objectives for 2005-06 Utilize Title III and TRIO grant programs to improve outreach to underserved populations. During 2005-06, the college will continue to develop recruitment strategies designed to diversify the college’s employee mix. Expand the number and type of publications used to advertise job openings to reach a wider applicant pool. Provide in-service training on Affirmative Action/I-200. 8 Resources – Manage the resources of the college efficiently and effectively and diversify the sources of revenue appropriately to achieve the mission and priorities of the college. Objectives for 2005-06 During 2005-06, request funding from the GHC Foundation beyond scholarship support. Increase FTE production to meet new increased allocation of 14. Initiate collaborative grant development with K-12, higher ed partners, and other organizations During 2005-06, continue work on currently funded capital projects including the Ilwaco Education Center and the Manspeaker Instructional Building. In 2005-06, begin the design phase for the new Vocational Building. In December 2005, request capital project funding for the 2007-09 biennium. By summer 2005, complete and begin implementation of the revised facilities master plan. Create a parking task force to evaluate anticipated parking issues that will arise as the facilities master plan is implemented. 9 Marketing – Effectively market and promote GHC programs and the services provided. Objectives for 2005-06 Develop formal marketing plan for 2005-06 academic year. Increase the proportion of recent high school graduates enrolling in Fall 2005 from 23% to 25%. Determine the reasons for enrollment fluctuations and develop strategies for improvement. In 2005-06, hire a marketing firm through an RFP process to assist in the evaluation and development of a college-wide marketing plan. 10 Cultural Enhancement –Continue to provide high quality and culturally enriching art exhibitions, activities, presentations, and performances. Objectives for 2005-06 Increase funding support for the Bishop Center for Performing Arts. Develop a plan to secure funding for a summer production designed to provide performance opportunities for area youth. Provide resources, managed by the Cultural Events Committee, to sponsor 2 lectures per quarter on campus i.e., political figures, faculty from GHC or other colleges, outside lecturers. Appendix 4 Strategic Planning Committee Membership Strategic Planning Committee Membership Faculty Chris Aiken Diane Carter Darby Cavin Diane Hanson Mohammad Ibrahim Tom Kuester Laurie Laughery Rod McDonald Darrelyn Miller Chris Portmann Dan Pratt Brenda Rolfe Maloney Staff Jackie Blumberg Nancy Davis Donna Fowler Gloria Hibbs Randy Karnath Rebecca Spacek Admin Ed Brewster(chair) Marcee Britton Keith Foster Nancy DeVerse Dave Halverstadt Stan Horton Mike Kelly Leon Lead Sandy Lloyd Mark Reisman Debbie Reynvaan Diane Smith Gary Thomasson Arlene Torgerson Beate Wahl Barbara Wood Penny Woodruff Choul Wou Laurie Clary Appendix 5 – Vision, Mission and Values Grays Harbor College Vision, Mission and Values Adopted February 2006 VISION Grays Harbor College is committed to being the premier choice for excellence in education, training, and services, responsive to the diverse needs of our communities. MISSION Grays Harbor College is a student-centered institution that inspires academic achievement, prepares an excellent workforce, and fosters personal growth by providing outstanding educational and cultural opportunities for improving lives in a global community. VALUES Accessibility Community Diversity Excellence Integrity Learning Respect Success Leadership Appendix 6 & 7 – Strategic Directions and Goals Grays Harbor College Strategic Directions and Goals Adopted February 2006 Strategic Direction 1: Instruction Evaluate program offerings, scheduling, and resources across the district in order to formulate a comprehensive plan to meet the needs of our students and communities while promoting educational excellence in teaching and learning in accordance with the Desired Student Abilities. Goal 1.1: Develop and implement a system to evaluate all instructional programs to identify community needs for new programs, growth, continued status, or possible elimination. Goal 1.2: Create a class schedule that is more flexible and provides options for the diverse community of students in our district. Goal 1.3: Expand faculty professional development opportunities that enhance teaching and learning. Goal 1.4: Explore and implement ways to improve articulation with K-12 and 4-year colleges. Goal 1.5: Support innovation and excellence in programming in alignment with the Desired Student Abilities. Strategic Direction 2: College Climate and Staffing Evaluate and enhance college climate by providing effective leadership and promoting productive and satisfying relationships among constituencies. Goal 2.1: Support professional development for all constituencies, including team training and leadership development. Goal 2.2: Develop and implement a plan for staffing based on need, as made evident through data and information. Goal 2.3: Increase communication and collaboration among constituent groups to provide an environment in which all people feel respected and valued. Goal 2.4: Increase coordination between internal departments. Goal 2.5: Enhance appreciation for the richness of diversity through hiring, student outreach, professional development opportunities, and workshops. Strategic Direction 3: Communications & Outreach Develop and implement a comprehensive (internal and external) communications and outreach plan to increase student and community access and enrollments, and to communicate a positive image of the college to the communities it serves. Goal 3.1: Design and implement systems that increase awareness, outreach and collaboration with K-12 constituents including district boards, administration, staff and students. Goal 3.2: Continue to foster opportunities for cultural growth and awareness among students, staff and the community. Appendix 6 & 7 – Strategic Directions and Goals Goal 3.3: Develop systems to build and strengthen communication and partnerships with the larger community including nonprofit organizations, labor, industry, government agencies, colleges and universities, and community and service groups. Goal 3.4: Assess and improve communication systems for engaging staff, students, and community, contributing to the promotion of a positive image of GHC. Goal 3.5: Design and implement systems that identify and enhance communication with underserved and untapped populations. Strategic Direction 4: Resources and Budget Align budget, resource allocation, operations, and decision-making with the Strategic Plan and the mission of the college. Goal 4.1: Create an environment that ensures participation and communication regarding the budget process. Goal 4.2: Explore, identify and implement options for alternative resources to support the college and its mission. Goal 4.3: Explore, refine, and develop a plan to increase scholarship opportunities. Strategic Direction 5: Student Services Develop and implement a plan for the enhancement of student services and programs to support success for current and prospective students. Goal 5.1: Develop and implement a student centered plan to improve advising and entry services for all students, including students at outreach campuses and distance education students. Goal 5.2: Develop support systems for non-traditional student groups (ie, middle-aged and seniors, Hispanic population and other underserved groups). Goal 5.3: Provide more opportunities to enhance student learning experiences and social development through student activities outside of the classroom. Strategic Direction 6: Technology/Equipment/Facilities Develop and communicate a comprehensive, college-wide vision for the integration of technology, equipment and facilities including appropriate training for all staff. Goal 6.1: Develop and implement a process for assessing instructional and administrative technology needs. Goal 6.2: Develop and implement a comprehensive and college wide plan for technology purchases, updates and maintenance, based on needs assessment. Goal 6.3: Develop and implement a comprehensive and college wide plan for equipment and facilities purchases, updates and maintenance. Goal 6.4: Provide technology training opportunities for faculty and staff. Goal 6.5: Develop and implement a comprehensive plan for safety and security at all college facilities. Appendix 8 Grays Harbor College Template for Strategic Planning 2006-2008 Program: Administrator: Dean: Staff: Faculty: Full-time Part-time History and Mission: Please provide a brief history of this program and its mission. Include enrollment trends during the last three years (2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05) with an analysis of significant increases or decreases. Assessment (DSAs and/or Program Review): When was the program last reviewed (if applicable), and what were the recommendations? How are /DSAs assessed? Please provide status and data. Staffing: Is current staffing (including faculty) level adequate to support this program? What staffing needs do you anticipate in the next two years? Equipment/Technology: Is current equipment and technology adequate to support the program? What equipment/technology needs do you foresee during the next two years? Achievement of Previous Year’s Goals/Strategies: [This may not be applicable until the second year of using this process.] Future of the Program: What are the short-term (1-3 years) and long-term (3-10 years) goals for this program? How do these relate to the college’s vision, mission, and values? Goals and Strategies for the next two years: Beginning on the next page is the matrix that contains the six Strategic Directions and 26 College-wide Goals, which will guide the decisions, strategies, and resource allocation during the next two years. Under each goal, if applicable, develop strategies that are specific and measurable, including who is responsible, collaborators, assessment measures, a timeline for completion, and estimated budget impact (if any). Strategies will be assessed at the end of one year but may be continued through the second year or beyond. Some helpful suggestions for filling in the matrix: 1. Write specific, measurable, strategies (actions) that your program will take during the next two years toward the fulfillment of any one or more of the 26 goals. Every program at the college will be working to take us forward in the six Strategic Directions. 2. You are not expected to write a strategy for every goal! But you may have more than one strategy under a single goal. 3. Many goals will not have a “budget impact” beyond the cost of daily operations; others will need to be funded in order to become actionable. These will be considered by the executive team and the budget development committee. Not all initiatives can be funded, but this document is an opportunity to put your ideas, needs, and plans into writing so that they can be discussed in the context of the overall picture of the college—and its mission and vision. Do not include equipment and staff that are already part of your budget. 4. Remember that these Strategic Directions, Goals, and the strategies that you write are for the next two years (July 1, 2006 to June 30, 2008). You do not have to do everything at once, and your timelines should reflect this two year period. 5. At the end of the first year (June 30, 2007), we will assess the progress on all strategies, and we will also have an opportunity to ask whether all the strategies are still relevant and whether circumstances have changed requiring us to write new strategies. 6. Strategies should be written as statements of action. Matrix for Strategic Planning 2006-2008 – Grays Harbor College STRATEGIC DIRECTION 1: Instructional Programs Evaluate program offerings, scheduling, and resources across the district in order to formulate a comprehensive plan to meet the needs of our students and communities while promoting educational excellence in teaching and learning in accordance with the Desired Student Abilities. GOAL 1.1: Develop and implement a system to evaluate all instructional programs to identify community needs for new programs, growth, continued status, or possible elimination. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT GOAL 1.2: Create a class schedule that is more flexible and provides options for the diverse community of students in our district. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT GOAL 1.3: Expand faculty professional development opportunities that enhance teaching and learning. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES GOAL 1.4 Explore and implement ways to improve articulation with K-12 and 4-year colleges. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT GOAL 1.5: Support innovation and excellence in programming in alignment with the Desired Student Abilities. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT STRATEGIC DIRECTION 2: College Climate and Staffing Evaluate and enhance college climate by providing effective leadership and promoting productive and satisfying relationships among constituencies. GOAL 2.1: Support professional development for all constituencies, including team training and leadership development. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT GOAL 2.2: Develop and implement a plan for staffing based on need, as made evident through data and information. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT GOAL 2.3: Increase communication and collaboration among constituent groups to provide an environment in which all people feel respected and valued. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT GOAL 2.4: Increase coordination between internal departments. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS GOAL 2.5: Enhance appreciation for the richness of diversity through hiring, student outreach, professional development opportunities, and workshops. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT STRATEGIC DIRECTION 3: Communications and Outreach Develop and implement a comprehensive (internal and external) communications and outreach plan to increase student and community access and enrollments, and to communicate a positive image of the college to the communities it serves. GOAL 3.1: Design and implement systems that increase awareness, outreach and collaboration with K-12 constituents including district boards, administration, staff and students. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT GOAL 3.2: Continue to foster opportunities for cultural growth and awareness among students, staff and the community. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT GOAL 3.3: Develop systems to build and strengthen communication and partnerships with the larger community including nonprofit organizations, labor, industry, government agencies, colleges and universities, and community and service groups. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT GOAL 3.4: Assess and improve communication systems for engaging staff, students, and community, contributing to the promotion of a positive image of GHC. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT GOAL 3.5: Design and implement systems that identify and enhance communication with underserved and untapped populations. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT STRATEGIC DIRECTION 4: Resources and Budget Align budget, resource allocation, operations, and decision-making with the Strategic Plan and the mission of the college. GOAL 4.1: Create an environment that ensures participation and communication regarding the budget process. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT GOAL 4.2: Explore, identify and implement options for alternative resources to support the college and its mission. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT GOAL 4.3: Explore, refine, and develop a plan to increase scholarship opportunities. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES STRATEGIC DIRECTION 5: Student Services Develop and implement a plan for the enhancement of student services and programs to support success for current and prospective students. GOAL 5.1: Develop and implement a student centered plan to improve advising and entry services for all students, including students at outreach campuses and distance education students. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT GOAL 5.2: Develop support systems for non-traditional student groups (i.e., middle-aged and seniors, Hispanic population and other underserved groups). STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT GOAL 5.3: Provide more opportunities to enhance student learning experiences and social development through student activities outside of the classroom. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT STRATEGIC DIRECTION 6: Technology/Equipment/Facilities Develop and communicate a comprehensive, college-wide vision for the integration of technology, equipment and facilities including appropriate training for all staff. GOAL 6.1: Develop and implement a process for assessing instructional and administrative technology needs. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT GOAL 6.2: Develop and implement a comprehensive and college wide plan for technology purchases, updates and maintenance, based on needs assessment. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT MEASURES GOAL 6.3: Develop and implement a comprehensive and college wide plan for equipment and facilities purchases, updates and maintenance. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT GOAL 6.4: Provide technology training opportunities for faculty and staff. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS GOAL 6.5: Develop and implement a comprehensive plan for safety and security at all college facilities. STRATEGY RESPONSIBILITY COLLABORATORS ASSESSMENT MEASURES TIMELINE BUDGET IMPACT Appendix 9 GHC’s Plan for Educational Assessment GHC’s Plan for Educational Assessment is a comprehensive, campus-wide system of evaluation which requires assessment, documentation, and analysis of student learning at the course, program and institutional levels and allocates resources to meet this requirement. The Plan contains the following components: • Articulation of Student Learning Outcomes - A syllabi development process links course outcomes to student learning outcomes (Desired Student Abilities) and rates the emphasis for each Desired Student Ability in every course. Tracking and documentation is maintained by the Office of Institutional Research and the Office of the Vice President. A database system allows for analysis of this data at the instructor, course, division, and program level. • Assessment of Student Outcomes (3-year cycle) - A three-year ongoing Assessment Cycle has been established for the appraisal of student work leading to certificates and degrees. Each Desired Student Ability is assessed over a three-quarter period involving three phases: development of the Assessment Matrix; piloting the assessment across the division and collecting student work; and completion of an Assessment Analysis. Divisions begin assessment of a new Desired Student Ability each quarter. The Office for Institutional Research is responsible for monitoring and assisting division faculty as they complete this process. • Assessment of Institutional Effectiveness - An annual Institutional Effectiveness Report provides faculty, staff, and administration with multiple indicators for the evaluation of student learning and the effectiveness of programs and services. The report is based on indicators of effectiveness which have been developed by the Board of Trustees to measure the college’s success at meeting GHC’s Priority Goals. A campus-wide committee analyzes the report and develops an annual Plan for Improvement to address any weaknesses revealed. Thorough analysis of student learning at Grays Harbor College is based on data from many diverse sources including student work, a comprehensive Data Warehouse system linking student outcomes with employment; national and locally developed surveys designed to assess the perception of current students and graduates; Employer Needs Assessments; and data provided through the community colleges’ statewide student management system. The Office for Institutional Research is responsible for conducting institutional assessment activities and the data is analyzed by all campus constituencies. • Allocation of Resources – Funding to support changes based on assessment is available through multiple sources: the institutional operating budget, state allocation, one-time funding, and since 2004-05, grant funds under the Title III Strengthening Institutions grant. Divisions submit and prioritize budget requests through the budget development process. Funding requests must be clearly linked to improvements in teaching and student learning. In addition, dedicated funding is available to address Improvement Objectives that have been identified in the Plan for Improvement. The State Board for Community and Technical Colleges provides each college in the system with a state allocation to support Outcomes Assessment projects. Funding for special projects related to specific outcomes, i.e., diversity/cultural awareness, can also be requested from committees responsible for that outcome. Articulation of Student Learning Outcomes In 1999 the campus community adopted five Desired Student Abilities as general education outcomes for all students at Grays Harbor College. These general education outcomes are designed to foster student development in the following competencies: Disciplinary Learning, Literacy, Critical Thinking, Social and Personal Responsibility, and Information Use. These Desired Student Abilities were reviewed and reaffirmed by faculty, staff, and administration in the 2001-2002 academic year. During fall 2003 faculty developed objectives for each of the Desired Student Abilities to more specifically answer the question - “What will students know or be able to do when they have achieved each of the Desired Student Abilities?” These objectives serve as the framework for assessment and faculty may add division-specific objectives as appropriate. Assessment of Student Outcomes (2003 - 2006) The objectives provide the foundation for a three-year cycle of systematic and continuous assessment of each of the five Desired Student Abilities that GHC has established as student learning outcomes. Assessment will take place at the division level with each division following a develop, pilot, analyze, revise, continue format: Develop During the development phase each division will discuss the extent to which the division teaches and assesses the Desired Student Ability. By the end of the quarter, an Assessment Matrix will be completed that outlines the performance criteria to be evaluated, the strategies that will be used and the assessment method. Using the objectives established for each of the Desired Student Abilities at the fall kick-off, as well as any appropriate divisionspecific objectives, faculty identify performance criteria and develop assessment strategies and instruments that will demonstrate student achievement of the DSA. Pilot Within the relevant courses identified by the division, the assessment instruments are administered to measure student achievement of the assigned Desired Student Ability. Analyze Each division will analyze the data gathered from the assessment activity and complete the final two sections of the Assessment Matrix – recommendations and actions taken. In addition, an Assessment Analysis template has been developed to provide an easy, consistent format to document the year-long process, evaluate the successes and challenges revealed, and identify indicated changes. Revise Recommended changes in teaching, curriculum, program outcomes, and/or processes the division believes will result in higher student achievement of the Desired Student Ability are identified and implemented. Such changes are to be documented with specific timelines established to assess the effect of the changes on student outcomes. Continue Each division will begin the development phase for a new Desired Student Ability each academic quarter. Members of the Outcomes Assessment Committee and Administrative team were assigned as mentors to attend division meetings and serve as a resource for faculty as they work through the assessment cycle. Assessment Cycle--Year One Divisions chose one of the Desired Student Abilities to begin the assessment cycle for fall quarter 2003. Once it was determined where each division would start, a 3-year assessment cycle was established. This cycle ensures that the assessment process will be comprehensive and useful. The first year in this process culminated in reports from divisions that described an entire sequence (develop, pilot, analyze, revise) for each specific Desired Student Ability. Assessment Cycle--Year Two By the end of spring quarter 2004, each division had completed the full assessment cycle for the Desired Student Ability they were assigned in Fall 2003. During Fall 2004, divisions will be completing the analysis phase for the DSA they began winter quarter, piloting assessments developed last spring for their third DSA, and developing the matrix for assessment of a fourth DSA. In order to facilitate learning from each other, faculty have been provided with a list of all of the objectives used by divisions in 2003-04 to assess the five Desired Student Abilities and a summary of each divisions assessment, findings and recommendations. Every faculty member has a copy of the 3-year assessment cycle grid identifying the phase for each division in each quarter so that faculty can collaborate with colleagues. SCCC was not included as a separate division within the 3-year Assessment Plan, but will begin this process with the 2004-05 academic year. Faculty members from all programs at SCCC will assess the same agreed upon DSA and will follow the develop, pilot, analyze process used on the main campus. They will complete the cycle for one DSA each year rather than beginning a new one each quarter due to a much heavier teaching load compared to on-campus faculty. Assessment Cycle--Year Three By the 2005-06 academic year all divisions had completed development and pilot phases for each of the Desired Student Abilities and were in the analysis or revision phases of the assessment cycle. For those DSA’s earliest in the cycle, divisions were re-analyzing based on assessments that were repeated following implemented changes. Allocation of Resources GHC receives an annual allocation of $54,000 from the State Board for Community & Technical Colleges for outcomes assessment. These funds are used for assessment projects at the classroom, program and institutional level; professional development and travel for faculty and staff related to assessment; compensation for the outcomes assessment faculty liaison; and for support staff in the Office of Institutional Research. A half-time data technician was added to the staff in the 2003-2004 academic year to assist with institutional research and assessment. In 2003-04 each of the seven divisions received a stipend of $2000 to support implementation of the Plan for Educational Assessment. Those funds were used in a variety of ways including faculty development, attendance at conferences, compensation for individual faculty leadership, division retreats, and additional clerical support. Through the annual budget development process, divisions submit and prioritize budget requests as needed to support changes based on assessment data and analysis. During the 2004-05 budget development process, one-time funding of $100,000 was set aside to address the 2004-05 Improvement Objectives. $50,000 of that total was allocated to Instruction to address the Improvement Objectives and to provide resources to implement the recommendations resulting from assessment analysis. The other $100,000 was set aside for strategic planning and future initiatives. In 2005-06, $200,000 was allocated for the 2005-06 Improvement Objectives with $87,000 of that specified for instructional improvement. Assessment Cycle 2003 - 2006 All Divisions Appendix 10 All Divisions Develop Pilot Fall 2003 Winter 2004 Spring 2004 Fall 2004 Winter 2005 Spring 2005 DISC. LRN. – Math /Science LITERACY – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed CRIT. THNK. – Humanities & Nursing SOC.& PERS. RES. – Industrial Tech INFO. USE Business DISC. LRN. – Business LITERACY – Math /Science CRIT. THNK. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed SOC.& PERS. RES. – Humanities & Nursing INFO. USE – Industrial Tech DISC. LRN. – Math /Science LITERACY – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed CRIT. THNK. – Humanities & Nursing SOC.& PERS. RES. – Industrial Tech INFO. USE Business DISC. LRN. – Business LITERACY – Math /Science CRIT. THNK. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed SOC.& PERS. RES. – Humanities & Nursing INFO. USE – Industrial Tech DISC. LRN. – Business LITERACY – Math /Science CRIT. THNK. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed SOC.& PERS. RES. – Humanities & Nursing INFO. USE – Industrial Tech DISC. LRN. – Humanities & Nursing LITERACY – Industrial Tech CRIT. THNK. – Business SOC.& PERS. RES. – Math /Science INFO. USE – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed DISC. LRN. – Business LITERACY – Math /Science CRIT. THNK. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed SOC.& PERS. RES. – Humanities & Nursing INFO. USE – Industrial Tech DISC. LRN. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed LITERACY – Humanities & Nursing CRIT. THNK. – Industrial Tech SOC.& PERS. RES. – Business INFO. USE – Math /Science DISC. LRN. – Humanities & Nursing LITERACY – Industrial Tech CRIT. THNK. – Business SOC.& PERS. RES. – Math /Science INFO. USE – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed DISC. LRN. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed LITERACY – Humanities & Nursing CRIT. THNK. – Industrial Tech SOC.& PERS. RES. – Business INFO. USE – Math /Science 1 of 3 Fall 2005 Winter 2006 Spring 2006 All Divisions Analyze Fall 2003 Winter 2004 Spring 2004 Fall 2004 Winter 2005 Spring 2005 Fall 2005 Winter 2006 Spring 2006 DISC. LRN. – Math /Science LITERACY – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed CRIT. THNK. – Humanities & Nursing SOC.& PERS. RES. – Industrial Tech INFO. USE Business DISC. LRN. – Business LITERACY – Math /Science CRIT. THNK. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed SOC.& PERS. RES. – Humanities & Nursing INFO. USE – Industrial Tech DISC. LRN. – Math /Science LITERACY – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed CRIT. THNK. – Humanities & Nursing SOC.& PERS. RES. – Industrial Tech INFO. USE – Business DISC. LRN. – Business LITERACY – Math /Science CRIT. THNK. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed SOC.& PERS. RES. – Humanities & Nursing INFO. USE – Industrial Tech DISC. LRN. – Business LITERACY – Math /Science CRIT. THNK. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed SOC.& PERS. RES. – Humanities & Nursing INFO. USE – Industrial Tech DISC. LRN. – Business LITERACY – Math /Science CRIT. THNK. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed SOC.& PERS. RES. – Humanities & Nursing INFO. USE – Industrial Tech DISC. LRN. – Business LITERACY – Math /Science CRIT. THNK. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed SOC.& PERS. RES. – Humanities & Nursing INFO. USE – Industrial Tech DISC. LRN. – Business LITERACY – Math /Science CRIT. THNK. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed SOC.& PERS. RES. – Humanities & Nursing INFO. USE – Industrial Tech DISC. LRN. – Humanities & Nursing LITERACY – Industrial Tech CRIT. THNK. – Business SOC.& PERS. RES. – Math /Science INFO. USE – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed DISC. LRN. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed LITERACY – Humanities & Nursing CRIT. THNK. – Industrial Tech SOC.& PERS. RES. – Business INFO. USE – Math /Science DISC. LRN. – Humanities & Nursing LITERACY – Industrial Tech CRIT. THNK. – Business SOC.& PERS. RES. – Math /Science INFO. USE – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed DISC. LRN. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed LITERACY – Humanities & Nursing CRIT. THNK. – Industrial Tech SOC.& PERS. RES. – Business INFO. USE – Math /Science 2 of 3 All Divisions Revise Fall 2003 Winter 2004 Spring 2004 Fall 2004 Winter 2005 Spring 2005 Fall 2005 Winter 2006 Spring 2006 DISC. LRN. – Math /Science LITERACY – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed CRIT. THNK. – Humanities & Nursing SOC.& PERS. RES. – Industrial Tech INFO. USE Business DISC. LRN. – Business LITERACY – Math /Science CRIT. THNK. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed SOC.& PERS. RES. – Humanities & Nursing INFO. USE – Industrial Tech DISC. LRN. – Math /Science LITERACY – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed CRIT. THNK. – Humanities & Nursing SOC.& PERS. RES. – Industrial Tech INFO. USE – Business DISC. LRN. – Business LITERACY – Math /Science CRIT. THNK. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed SOC.& PERS. RES. – Humanities & Nursing INFO. USE – Industrial Tech DISC. LRN. – Business LITERACY – Math /Science CRIT. THNK. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed SOC.& PERS. RES. – Humanities & Nursing INFO. USE – Industrial Tech DISC. LRN. – Business LITERACY – Math /Science CRIT. THNK. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed SOC.& PERS. RES. – Humanities & Nursing INFO. USE – Industrial Tech DISC. LRN. – Business LITERACY – Math /Science CRIT. THNK. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed SOC.& PERS. RES. – Humanities & Nursing INFO. USE – Industrial Tech DISC. LRN. – Humanities & Nursing LITERACY – Industrial Tech CRIT. THNK. – Business SOC.& PERS. RES. – Math /Science INFO. USE – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed DISC. LRN. – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed LITERACY – Humanities & Nursing CRIT. THNK. – Industrial Tech SOC.& PERS. RES. – Business INFO. USE – Math /Science DISC. LRN. – Humanities & Nursing LITERACY – Industrial Tech CRIT. THNK. – Business SOC.& PERS. RES. – Math /Science INFO. USE – Social Science/PE & Dev Ed/Basic Ed 3 of 3 Appendix 11 GRAYS HARBOR COLLEGE Board Policy Subject: Vision, Mission, Values, Desired Student Abilities Board Policy Number: 106 Page 1 of 1 Date adopted: 1/17/06 The following are the Vision, Mission, Values, and Desired Student Abilities for Grays Harbor College: VISION STATEMENT: Grays Harbor College is committed to being the premier choice for excellence in education, training, and services, responsive to the diverse needs of our communities. MISSION STATEMENT: Grays Harbor College is a student-centered institution that inspires academic achievement, prepares an excellent workforce, and fosters personal growth by providing outstanding educational and cultural opportunities for improving lives in a global community. VALUES: Accessibility Community Diversity Excellence Integrity Learning Respect Success Leadership DESIRED STUDENT ABILITIES: Competency in the Disciplines Literacy Critical Thinking Social and Personal Responsibility Information Use The college will develop a strategic plan that is reflective of the stated values, and works within the mission to strive for accomplishment of the vision and desired student abilities of Grays Harbor College. This strategic plan will be monitored through periodic reports to the Board of Trustees. Appendix 12 – GHC Desired Student Abilities Grays Harbor College Desired Student Abilities Competency in the Disciplines Knowledge of content in prerequisite or transfer courses, as well as preparation for a career. Objectives: Each division/program to establish objectives and performance criteria relative to their disciplines. Literacy Skills in reading, writing, speaking, listening, and quantifying, as well as awareness and appreciation of learning styles and life-long learning options. Objectives: 1. Write clearly and effectively. 2. Demonstrate skills in mathematic reasoning and application. 3. Present ideas and information clearly and appropriately in speaking to others. 4. Demonstrate literal and inferential reading skills for comprehension and vocabulary development. Critical Thinking Competency in analysis, synthesis, problem solving, decision making, creative exploration, and formulation of an aesthetic response. Objectives: 1. Analyze ideas objectively using established criteria. 2. Solve problems by combining and applying knowledge from multiple sources. 3. Evaluate a proposed solution using appropriate criteria. Social and Personal Responsibility Awareness of and responsiveness to diversity and commonality among cultures, multiplicity of perspectives, ethical behaviors, and health and wellness issues. Objectives: 1. Demonstrate awareness of and responsiveness to diversity and commonality among cultures. 2. Recognize ethical responsibilities in a global society. 3. Develop an appreciation for good health habits and physical fitness. Information Use Skills in accessing and evaluating information resources including campus resources, awareness of the role of information resources in making sound decisions, and command of the skills required to use appropriate technologies effectively. Objectives: 1. Demonstrate an awareness of the role of information resources in making sound decisions. 2. Demonstrate the skills needed to access appropriate information resources. 3. Evaluate multiple sources of information for quality and relevance. Appendix 13 – Title III Faculty Projects Funded TITLE III FACULTY DEVELOPMENT Number Department Name Last Name First Name 1 Roush Adrienne Library Curriculum revision of linked Library/English course for Fall 2005 Summer 2005 $509.76 2 Winsor Shiloh Dev Ed Curriculum revision of linked Library/English course for Fall 2005 Summer 2005 $509.76 3 Ibrahim Mohammad Science/Math Curriculum development VR labs Summer 2005 $1,274.40 4 Kuester Tom Science/Math Math 98 guide for PT instructors & students Summer 2005 $637.20 5 Carter Diane Science/Math Curriculum development for new Bio 208 labs Summer 2005 $1,274.40 6 Swan Cal Industrial Tech Curriculum revision of Carpentry Class assignments Summer 2005 $637.20 7 Buisman Brion Industrial Tech Curriculum development of new Diesel Technology courses Summer 2005 $1,274.40 8 Lerych Lynne Humanities Curriculum revision of Engl 95 & Engl 101 Fall 2005 $637.20 9 DeBoer Allison Humanities Curriculum revision of Engl 95 & Engl 101 Fall 2005 $637.20 10 Bergstrom Teah SCCC Development of GED test taking resource pamphlet Fall 2005 $637.20 13 Ashe Bobbi SCCC College Reading and Learning Association Conference Fall 2005 $1,114.32 14 Bowers Linda SCCC College Reading and Learning Association Conference Fall 2005 $1,270.95 15 Sandgren Erik Humanities Humanities Conference Fall 2005 $125.00 16 Lerych Lynne Humanities Humanities Conference Fall 2005 $125.00 17 Lerych Jacek Humanities Humanities Conference Fall 2005 $125.00 18 Winsor Shiloh Dev Ed Humanities Conference Fall 2005 $125.00 19 Cavin Darby Humanities Humanities Conference Fall 2005 $125.00 20 Larson Dale Humanities Humanities Conference Fall 2005 $125.00 11 Hanson Diane Dev Ed International Reading Conference Spring 2005 $894.30 12 Barker Kathy Dev Ed International Reading Conference Spring 2005 $1,831.45 21 Barker Kathy Dev Ed NADE Conference (travel costs estimated) Winter 2006 $845.00 22 Laughery Laurie Dev Ed NADE Conference (travel costs estimated) Winter 2006 $845.00 Total Project Description QuarterYear Amount $15,579.74 Appendix 14 GHC Committees and Changes GHC Committees 2001-02 Committees AA Degree Academic Review Advising Calendar Computer & Related Technologies Task Force Cultural Events Environmental Design Faculty Excellence Human Resources Human Subjects Legislative Library Advisory Model Watershed Multi-Culture Outcomes President’s Cabinet Safety Scholarship Staff Development and Training Student Services Council Technology Fee Wellness Campus committees appointed membership: Dismissal Review Division Chairs Instructional Council President’s Cabinet Sabbatical Selection Tenure Review 2002-03 Deleted Model Watershed 2003-04 Added Diversity (formerly Multi-Culture) Deleted Multi-Culture 2004-05 Added Arts Commission Added Bishop Center Events Added 2004-05 Budget Added Celebration Appendix 14 GHC Committees and Changes Deleted Environmental Design Added Strategic Planning 2005-06 Added Enrollment Management Added Speaker Appendix 15 – Trustees’ Biographies Grays Harbor College Board of Trustees CAROL CARLSTAD • Appointed October 2000 • Board Chair 2004-05 • Vice President, The Bank of the Pacific • Past-president, Montesano Chamber of Commerce • Past President and Board Member, Montesano Community Education • Leadership roles in several community and school organizations • Three children • 306 Wilder Lane, Montesano, WA 98563, (360) 533-8873, ext. 1226, [email protected] REBECCA CHAFFEE • Appointed 2004 • Manager, Port of Willapa Harbor • Former Public Works Director, City of Raymond • Numerous community service and improvement projects for North Pacific County • University of Washington • Spouse: Gordon • Two sons, one daughter • 10 Washington Cemetery Road, Raymond, WA 98577, (360)942-3422 (h), [email protected] DENNIS COLWELL • Appointed 1998 • Board Chair 2002-03 • Attorney (business & municipal law) • Former chief civil deputy Prosecutor Grays Harbor County; WA State Bar Association • Legislative committee • Hearing officer for disciplinary board • WA State Trial Lawyers • Grays Harbor County Bar Association Past President • United Way of Grays Harbor, Executive Committee, Drive Chairman, President, and Admissions and Distributions Committee Chairman • Board of Directors/President of Evergreen Counseling Center • Grays Harbor Historical Seaport Authority • Aberdeen Rotary • Board of Directors of Grays Harbor Economic Development Council • Attended Whitman College; University of WA, BA; University of WA Law School, J.D. • Spouse: Dotty • Three children • 3343 Wishkah Road, Aberdeen, WA 98520, (360)533-5213 (h), (360)533-2865 (w), [email protected] Appendix 15 – Trustees’ Biographies JOHN WARRING • Appointed 1999 • Clinical Biologist at Grays Harbor Community Hospital • Board of Directors, United Food and Commercial Workers Union local 1001 • President, Grays Harbor Central Labor Council • Exec. President, Grays Harbor & Pacific County Labor Councils 2001 • Committee Member, Grays Harbor Economic Development Council • Grays Harbor Democratic Central Committee • Advisory Committee, From Dreams to Realities: Diversify Rural Economies of the Pacific Northwest • Co-chairman, Yes! Stafford Creek in 1994 • Labor Representative, Pacific Mountain Private Industry Council • Grays Harbor College Workforce Training Advisory Committee • Coalition for a Livable WA • University of Wisconsin Madison, BS in Medical Microbiology • 235 N. River Road, Cosmopolis, WA 98537, (360)532-2643, [email protected] FAWN SHARP-MALVINI • Appointed 2004 • Reservation attorney, lead counsel, Quinault Indian Nation • Member, Board of Governors for State Bar Association • Co-chair of National Congress of American Indians, Sovereignty Protection Initiative • AA degree, Grays Harbor College 1988 • BA Gonzaga University • JD, University of Washington 1995 • Spouse: Daniel Malvini • One son • 579 Duck Lake Drive Se, Ocean Shores, WA 98569, [email protected] Grays Harbor College Instruction Organizational Chart 2005-2006 President Ed Brewster VP for Instruction Laurie Clary (interim) Asst Dean ABE/ESL Gary Thomasson Coordinator ABE Linda Blauvelt Part Time ABE/ESL Faculty Simpson Education Center Whiteside Education Center Dean Extended Learning Mark Reisman Stafford Creek Correction Center Asst Dean of Education Catherine Slagle Faculty Liaison Chris Aiken Bobbie Ashe Randy Bale Teah Bergstrom Director Education Centers Leon Lead Columbia Education Center Riverview Education Center Dean Workforce Education Mike Kelly Business Division John Clary Jeff Farnam Linda Kim Sandra Miller Guy Slover Debra Sturgill Indusrial Technology Division Chair Darrelyn Miller Division Chair Rod McDonald Scott Blankenship Brion Buisman Ron Deaton Denis Samson Doug Jones Cal Swan Divisions Humanities and Communication Science and Math Director Penny Woodruff These Programs are both Professional Technical and Transfer Criminal Justice*** Social Science and Physical Education Developmental and Basic Education Division Chair Tom Kuester Division Chair Chris Portmann Division Chair Diane Hanson Allison DeBoer Diane Carter Gary Arthur Kathy Barker Brad Duffy John Hillier Ron Bradbury (Criminal Justice***) Trish Dutro Dale Larson Mohammad Ibrahim Adrienne Roush Laurie Laughery Jacek Lerych Russ Jones Jack Dutro (Human Services**) Lynne Lerych Jeff Koskela Gary Murrell Robert Richardson Randy Lehr (Natural Resources*) Charlie Watkins Mark Zerr Nursing and Health Sciences Asst Dean Libary and Media Services Stan Horton Divsion Chair Darby Cavin Dan Pratt Linda Bowers Doug Carley Assistant to the VP Maureen Espedal Shiloh Winsor Erik Sandgren Jim Pringle Lynn Siedenstrang Human Services** Corrie Hightower Natural Resources Technology* Sue Litster Carol O'Neal Monica Todd Jane Wilson Kelly Toda 3/7/2006 Grays Harbor College Administrative Team 2006 Edward Brewster President Sandy Zelasko Asst. to President Laurie Clary (interim) VP for Instruction Arlene Torgerson VP for Student Services Maureen Espedal Asst. to VP Mike Kelly Dean for Workforce. Ed. Penny Woodruff Director of Nursing Mark Reisman Dean for Extended Learning Catherine Slagle Asst. Dean for Corrections Ed. Debbie Richters Coord. Workforce Ed & Retraining Web Stiles PRI Coordinator Darrell Solomon Coord. Job Development & Placement Leon Lead Director of Off-Campus Community Ed Margo Hood Asst. to VP Beate Wahl Chief of Campus Operations/Aux. Services Nancy Deverse Assoc. Dean Student Services Barbara Wood Asst. Dean of Financial Services Dave Halverstadt Chief of Human Resources Sandy Lloyd Chief of Information Services Arnel Blancas Foundation & Resource Development Director Jane Goldberg Director of Public Relations Melissa Barnes Director of Advising & Counseling Nadine Hibbs Director of Financial Aid Wes Peterson Athletic Director JEB Thornton Director of Trio Grant Gary Thomasson Asst. Dean for ABE/GED Keith Foster VP for Administrative Services Marcee Britton Asst. Director for School-College Relations & Coord. World Class Scholars & Tech Prep Debbie Reynvaan Director for Institutional Research Diane Smith Director of Title III Grant Julie Skokan TRiO - Student Support Specialist Sarah Aiken Coord. Workfirst Laurie Ratcliff Coord. of The Learning Center Linda Blauvelt Coord. Adult Basic Education Petra Shenk Transition Services Facilitator John Rajcich Coord. Disability Support Services Choul Wou Coord. of Student Activities and Leadership Programs Stan Horton Asst. Dean for Library Services Updated 2/3/06 STANDARD SEVEN - FINANCE SUMMARY REPORT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES YEAR 1 (00-01) AMOUNT YEAR 2 (01-02) AMOUNT YEAR 3 (02-03) AMOUNT YEAR 4 (03-04) AMOUNT YEAR 5 (04-05) ** AMOUNT Revenues 16,844,188 17,783,564 17,352,752 19,068,565 19,311,476 Expenditures 16,189,322 17,013,836 16,643,409 18,132,726 18,817,003 654,866 769,728 709,343 935,839 494,473 Net Operational Excess (Deficit) ** Note: due to the timing of IPEDS reporting, FY04-05 data is based on "Draft" IPEDS data, all other years are based on Actual IPEDS data.